Nigel Farage & the Brexit Party.

mai 13th, 2019

BCiP member Evelyne Joslain in her article below on the UK’s Brexit Party, is sorry that there is currently no equivalent « French Farage ».

Farage et le Brexit Party

BREXIT – How did we get here?

mai 6th, 2019

How did the UK get to where it stands today with Brexit asks BCiP member Andrew Crawford, as he traces the tortuous path Britain has taken in his position paper below.

Brexit- How did we get here?

Disability & Inclusion – Conservative Policy Forum Submission (BCiP)

janvier 6th, 2019
Name of Constituency: Conservatives Abroad
Name of CPF Group: British Conservatives in Paris (BCiP)
Name of CPF Coordinator: Paul Thomson
Email address:
Number of attendees: Aged <25 25-39 40-65 >65
Members: 1 3 (+ 1 who sent in comments)
Non-members: 1 (+ 1 who sent in comments)
Date of meeting: 18th December 2018
If you have a Conservative MP, please tick this box to confirm that you have sent a copy of this response to your MP: 
Please indicate whether you used the accompanying video and powerpoint presentation and, if so, how useful you found them or in what ways you might suggest they could have been improved:
Video Powerpoint Feedback:
We used it
We did not use it X X


1.    Housing: How might we better build homes and buildings that everyone can access and use, so as to build a society in which all can participate fully?  –  (i) For both social and private housing projects a minimum percentage for disabilities-friendly units should be imposed by law.   (ii) Already used measures for assisting the disabled should be expanded as much as reasonably possible eg (a) automatic/push buttons doors, (b) installation of escalators or lifts, (c) providing sufficiently wide corridors, WC’s etc so that those in wheelchairs or otherwise encumbered (eg with crutches) can nevertheless move about.   (iii) Explore the use of robots to facilitate life for the disabled mainly at home but also in the workplace & in public spaces.   (iv) The potential for public private partnerships should be explored and (with suitable safeguards) realised.  (a) There have been successful examples in the UK eg Civitas.  (b) In France the housing sector for elderly people not able to look after themselves has been usefully expanded by recourse to privately funded entities working within the framework of public standards (including enforcement mechanisms).  (c) The trend toward increasing focus by (large) private companies on “corporate social responsibility” could no doubt be tapped by encouraging companies to contribute to more disabled-friendly buildings (special financial incentives?  Bestowing of a flattering public label expressing recognition of “good works”?).  (d) Resort to specialised services companies may also allow innovative solutions to particular needs to be achieved.  In France this is a sector – in particular in relation to services provided in a hospital setting – which is undergoing a spectacular degree of development, notably through services accessible online but allowing tailoring of what is actually carried out to meet users’ specific needs/wishes.   (v) For those already housed but having developed a disability post-moving in the provision of financial support for making necessary adjustments to the home environment – may result in the person being able to continue to carry on a relatively normal existence in society where, without such support, he/she would not be able to do so (or not without being a greater burden on public services in other ways).


2.    Transport: How might we better adapt our transport systems so as to offer people with disabilities the same access to transport as everyone else?  –  (i) Expand use of special markers to guide the disabled.   (ii) Avoid steps in trains & buses.   (iii) Encourage the provision of services in trains (insofar as not already available) to alleviate the difficulties of those with mobility problems.   (iv) So far as reasonably possible provide lifts & escalators in train & bus stations – & indicate on corresponding maps which stations provide ease of access for those with mobility limitations.   (v) More broadly:  include in the government’s “Transport Strategy” regulations for disabled passengers to facilitate access to & egress from taxis, buses, trams, trains & air transport systems.   (vi) Take measures to avoid blockages on pavements (eg rubbish bins) which can create major problems for those moving about by wheel chair (eg if the pavement is not wide enough to avoid the obstacles without going onto the roadway).  Perhaps introduce fines to discourage a-social behaviour in this area?   (vii) Ensure ongoing recognition of disability badges issued by other EU member states – even after Brexit & even if no specific agreement on reciprocity on the subject is achieved between the UK & EU27 or other member states individually.


3.    Health: How might we more effectively reduce the health gap experienced by people with a learning disability, mental health conditions or autism, so as to help everyone to live full, healthy and independent lives?  –  (i) Supply training programmes to favour the employability of the disabled.   (ii) Provide/facilitate regular medical and/or psychological surveillance of those in need in order to avoid a gradual (or abrupt) disengagement from society.   (iii) Foster a culture of respect for those with disabilities – underlining the shared humanity of us all; and the importance to all of us of our vital needs being given due consideration by society.   (iv) Expand the Health Charter to include health care providers to those with learning disabilities, mental health conditions or autism.


4.    Employment: How might we work more effectively with employers and people with health conditions so as to help as many as possible to get into and stay in employment?  –  (i) Require employers with above a given threshold of employees to employ a minimum percentage of disabled persons or to contribute to one of a designated set of programmes favouring the inclusion in the work force of the disabled.   (ii) Grant financial support to employers (where appropriate) to assist in the recruiting & training & retention of disabled persons.   (iii) Develop sophisticated but pedagogically effective on-line & obligatory training models for (a) HR personnel, (b) non-disabled (future) fellow employees & (c) the disabled – to provide a guide to the integration of the disabled in the work place:  akin to what is presently done in the field of compliance in large organisations.   (iv) Determine with employers the special needs of specific groups eg (a) ex-servicemen (cf PTSD), (b) ex-prisoners etc.


5.    Participation in Society: How might we better support candidates with disabilities to stand for public office, so that those elected better reflect the diversity of society?  –  (i) Supply public assistance eg for transport for candidates with disabilities (ie so it would not have to come out of the campaign budget).   (ii) Create a very low minimum required number of representatives of disabled persons – to habituate the general public to the idea that being handicapped is not necessarily incompatible with assuming public responsibilities.   (iii) Avoid too “macho” a political culture – though this is not intended to suggest that robust debate & rhetoric should be discouraged.  Gestures suggesting physical contact should be proscribed (if this is not already the case).   (iv) Opinion “elevation” campaigns could be carried out to promote the idea that the public realm is one in which, to be sure there is a healthy competition for voter support – but which also should by definition be open to all:  we should all look at our fellow members of the body politic & of society with a heightened sensitivity for our common humanity & our shared interest in making work the society & institutions of the UK.   (v) Those interested in politics & possibly standing for office should be encouraged to join the Conservative Parties (or even other parties if they must!) & should be given canvassing support initially at the local council level & then at the national level – in appropriate cases, but these should be sought out – to achieve a demonstration that persons with handicaps can contribute to society also in politics (cf eg Robert Halpen MP; or indeed, to look abroad, Wolfgang Schäuble – longtime Finance Minister for Germany & today President of Germany’s lower chamber of parliament (Bundestag) & one of the most senior & most highly respected politicians in the land – notwithstanding being confined to wheelchair since the 1990s.


6.    Culture Change: How might we all deliver further positive change for people with disabilities, so that society does not miss out on the contribution of any person?  –  (i) Role models in public media (news/weather presenter) can be helpful:  there have been positive examples in the British media including the BBC.   (ii) See § 5(iv) above.   (iii) Honouring the disabled in a convincing/effective way ie designed to attract public attention & sympathy is worthwhile:  eg the Invictus Games.   (iv) As a complement to § (iii):  avoid going “over the top” ie making exaggerated or non-credible affirmations/claims.   (v) The Transforming Care programme at local community level & aimed at improving health outcomes and quality of life for those with a learning disability and/or autism could be promoted by:  (a) giving it more exposure in the media, (b) being expanded, (c) organising the sharing of experiences among/across local communities & (d) supporting the police in their dealings with those presenting “challenging behaviour”.


7. Is there any other question you think should have been asked or observation you would like to make?  –  (i) The Government (& the Conservative Party) should communicate much more about all that has been done in this area – which is absolutely considerable (cf Brief).  It is wrong that we should be perceived as unfeeling etc when on the contrary so much has been undertaken – in a serious, hands-on, long-term based fashion.  This represents a failure of communication, but also – and let us be positive – an opportunity to better inform the people of the UK & give them a fairer, and more uplifting, view of what the Conservative Party is.   (ii) As a corollary to the foregoing:  PR disasters such as the one deriving from the so-called “dementia tax” are best avoided.   (iii) The goal in the latest manifesto of getting one million more people with disabilities into employment (an increase of almost 30%) should not be kept under a barrel – and its greater social significance, namely of allowing all those people to be much more fully a part of society, should be clearly spelled out for the general public.   (iv) Special educational needs are a related topic.  Excellent results have been achieved in the education of children with Asperser’s syndrome over recent decades – allowing those concerned to limit considerable suffering & also to contribute in a material way to society (through the exceptional skills of the persons suffering from the same).  However, the provision of specialist help is considered by one of our participants as patchy – with greater concentration on this area being called for.



What did you find useful?  –  The paper as a whole was useful & well done.  Congratulations!


What did you not find helpful?  –  Nothing


Do you have any suggestions for how we might improve future briefings?  –  Not at this stage


Thank You.  Please return to:

Theresa May – Betrayal and Capitulation.

novembre 27th, 2018

BCiP member Evelyne Joslain in comparing the examples of  political giants such as Churchill or Thatcher, is not convinced by Prime Minister Theresa May’s « Brexit In Name Only » (BRINO) Withdrawal Agreement with the EU and proposes instead a « No-Deal » Brexit as the best solution going forward, despite the uncertainties of « several difficult months » to follow.

You can read her associated political analysis (in French) below.



novembre 21st, 2018

Here’s a critical review (in English and French) by BCiP member Monique Riccardi-Cubitt of an article on Brigitte Macron published in the Economist 1843 magazine:

In the name of French women has  Brigitte Macron truly come of age ? Do French women really identify with the story and life example of the spoilt petite-bourgeoise provincial teacher without ethics, who should have been judged condemned for having seduced aged 39 an under-age  teenager in her care, and enslaved him emotionally making him totally dependent prey to her wiles, will and ambition ?  The sycophantic tone of the article does not do justice to the subject of a French President’s wife who has no sense of the duties her position entails, and at a critical time in the nation’s history, shows no interest whatsoever in French people and their plight.  She has the profile of a IT and Essex girl : an inveterate shopper addicted to luxury goods, to being photographed with showbiz personalities, dripping in diamonds to receive the French football team at the Élysée, going to a football match in Haute Couture gold lamé, gaily spending public funds at a time of dire austerity. French women have better judgement and ethics. They still have taste and understand true elegance where less is more, like the pared down austerity of Chanel’s little black dress adorned with fake pearls. Mademoiselle Chanel, one of the celebrated high priestesses of French taste and elegance, had at her death only three suits in her wardrobe, Chanel of course, made of the wonderfully sensuous Scottish tweed her lover the Duke of Westminster had made her discover. This is class, French taste at its best, that has influenced the rest of the world for decades. This is true elegance that comes from the heart and innate taste, and shows true consideration and courtesy in adopting the appropriate clothing and manners to the occasion, not showing-off in the vulgar bling-bling manner of the nouveaux riches. French women deserve better as a life model than this superficial, frivolous, ambitious  former 60’s kitten who has ‘come of age’ as a French President’s wife, fuelled on by her unquenchable desire for spending,  power and luxury.


L’article BRIGITTE MACRON, AGENT PROVOCATRICE de Sophie Pedder dans le Magazine 1843,  The Economist, October/November 2018,  est particulièrement superficiel et se contente de répéter les propos mensongers officiels de l’agence de communication des Macrons et d’une presse populaire servile achetée par l’Élysée. La journaliste de l’Economist semble appartenir à ce groupe. Elle a sans doute été courtisée par Emmanuel Macron, qui pour redorer son blason particulièrement terni et écorné ces derniers mois, met systématiquement en avant la popularité grandement exagérée de sa femme derrière laquelle il se protège, révélant en lui l’adolescent attardé. C’est le rôle auquel ils sont tous deux demeurés psychologiquement depuis le moment traumatique de la transgression dans la séduction encore enfant à 15 ans, et qu’ils perpétuent tous deux en une dépendance émotionnelle mutuelle dans laquelle Brigitte Macron domine, comme elle le faisait alors dans son rôle de professeur. Un homme mûr et équilibré de 40 ans n’insiste pas pour avoir son épouse à ses côtés en toutes circonstances officielles. Il n’a pas besoin de la présence maternelle réconfortante d’une nounou qui lui tient la main pour le calmer et le rassurer, il assume seul en homme, les exigences de la fonction à laquelle il a été élu. Les revendications et propos soit disant féministes de Brigitte Macron ne consistent qu’à justifier sa présence et son influence intrusives sur cet homme pathologiquement immature sur lequel elle a tout misé, et a propulsé à cette position. Il voulait écrire, il se serait alors trouvé.  Elle lui a dit, confia t-il durant la campagne présidentielle, Si tu deviens écrivain tu seras un gigolo…Une déclaration révélatrice d’un professeur de Français passionnée par les Belles Lettres mais encore plus par l’argent ! La seule ressemblance avec Simone de Beauvoir est que toutes deux étant professeurs ont séduit des élèves mineurs sous leur charge. Ce pourquoi Simone de Beauvoir fut licenciée par l’Éducation Nationale, mais pas Brigitte Macron qui grâce aux réseaux d’influence de son père fut exonérée. Bien que le fait qu’elle attendit sa mort pour divorcer et épouser Emmanuel Macron semble indiquer qu’elle aurait sans doute été déshéritée si elle l’avait fait avant. Cette comparaison douteuse mise en avant par Marlène Schiappa, Secrétaire d’État de l’Égalité Homme/ Femme, répétée par Sophie Pedder ne révèle que l’obséquiosité de la première, la manque de jugement et d’éthique professionnelle de la seconde, et l’ignorance des deux. Les Français ne se reconnaissent en rien dans ce couple malsain. L’article pourrait avoir été dicté par les services de communication présidentiels. Il présente la version officielle flatteuse et édulcorée de la saga Macron, sous le couvert superficiel d’un certain intellectualisme parisien totalement déconnecté de l’âme et de l’esprit du pays, sans souci réel ni d’investigation ni d’analyse de la véritable situation. Or loin d’être la figure populaire décrite par l’article, Brigitte Macron, son attitude, son rôle, sa personnalité dominatrice, ses goûts pour le luxe, ses dépenses dispendieuses ont fait l’objet de commentaires, de réactions indignées, de pétitions qui s’accumulent après chaque nouvel excès. Le dernier en date est la rénovation de la Salle des Fêtes du Palais de l’Élysée estimée à 500 000 euros.

PETITIONS DE THIERRY PAUL VALETTE, Fondateur du mouvement Égalité Nationale :

Contre le statut officiel de première Dame « Brigitte Macron »

Le 28 juillet 2017, 319 410 signatures


6 sept. 2017 — Notre pétition est rentrée dans l’histoire , notre victoire également. Notre mobilisation a fait le tour du monde. La plupart des grands médias étrangers ayant relayé notre combat pour la démocratie. Du New York Times aux chaînes de télévision coréennes. Notre pétition à fait reculer le Président Emmanuel Macron. C’est un symbole fort adressé . Près de 320 000 signataires en peu de temps se sont mobilisés pour réaliser cet exploit. Ce fut le feuilleton politique et médiatique de l’été. Jamais une Pétition n’avait eu une telle ampleur médiatique et jamais un Président n’avait reculé aussi rapidement. Nous pouvons en être très fiers chers amis. Il n’y aura donc – aucun statut officiel de première pour Brigitte Macron -aucun budget dédié -aucune modification de la loi ou de la constitution En revanche une Charte de transparence est en place. Il s’agit comme je vous l’ai expliqué d’un autre combat, sur le fond, qui lui sera assez long. Nous le mènerons lui aussi le gagnerons. Chers signataires restons groupés.

Thierry Paul Valette

Contre la Charte de transparence de Brigitte Macron à 440 000 euros

Le 19 septembre 2017,   29 271 signatures

Nous avons élu à la tête de l’état un homme et non un couple. La fin de la monarchie et l’avènement de la république ont posé les limites de ces pratiques royales ancestrales.  À l’heure où nous devons faire des économies, payer des impôts de plus en plus élevés, être taxés de toute part, faire des sacrifices, en terminer avec les privilèges, il est inconcevable de maintenir en place une Charte de Transparence pour l’épouse du Président. Une  charte pour la modique somme de 440 000 euros, soit un des budgets les plus élevés pour une épouse de Président de la République.

En France, comme l’exige la Constitution on élit une personne et non un couple. Nous ne sommes plus sous l’Ancien Régime ou l’épouse d’un roi avait une fonction de fait publique voire politique. Avec l’avènement de la République l’idée de donner un statut politique à une épouse est devenue inenvisageable. Cela nous renverrait donc au passé monarchique de la France.

Le terme de « Première Dame » reste archaïque et ne rend nullement service à la cause féminine. En effet un rôle de par un statut parce que « femme de… » est un bond en arrière pour les combats gagnés jusqu’ici et de la condition de la femme en règle générale.

Non au rôle politique de Brigitte Macron.

Le 6 février 2018, 25 603 signatures


Madame Macron à MENTI aux Français. La création de la charte de transparence n’est qu’un prétexte, un moyen anti-démocratique pour l’épouse du chef de l’État afin d’obtenir un rôle politique sous le manteau. Cette Charte de transparence n’est donc par conséquent rien d’autre qu’un MENSONGE D’ÉTAT DE LA PART DE BRIGITTE MACRON .

Pour ce faire Emmanuel et Brigitte Macron ont refusé la concertation citoyenne proposée au moment de la première pétition . Ayant reçu une fin de non-recevoir nous continuons donc le combat…

L’annulation et le remboursement des 500 000 euros d’assiettes par les époux MACRON

Le 13 juin 2018, 38 565 signatures

Depuis l’arrivée à l’Élysée du couple présidentiel, les factures deviennent salées !Des frais de maquillage en quelques semaines facturés plus de 25 000 euros, une Charte de Transparence de 400 000 euros pour Brigitte Macron pour remplir des fonctions illégitimes, et maintenant des assiettes à plus de 500 000  euros la facture !

Cette indécence se passe à l’heure où le Président Emmanuel Macron fustige les aides sociales : «qui coûtent un pognon de dingue»

Dans un contexte de moralisation de la vie politique et publique, dans un contexte de transparence, cette commande démesurée est tout simplement inacceptable !

Les Français sont sans cesse sollicités : augmentation des impôts, baisse des retraites, augmentation de la CSG etc…Nombre d’entre eux ne peuvent plus partir en vacances, doivent boucler des fins de mois compliquées et n’ont pas les moyens de changer leur vaisselle EUX…. On leur demande de participer à l’effort national, d’être patients, d’avoir confiance.

C’est dans ce contexte social que  le couple présidentiel s’offre le luxe et le privilège de changer la vaisselle. Les époux Macron devraient d’avantage se préoccuper des conditions INQUIÉTANTES des millions de français qui vivent en dessous du seuil de pauvreté plutôt que des assiettes dans lesquelles ils vont manger pendant 4 ans !

Dans une démocratie, le respect des règles de transparence est indispensable au bon fonctionnement des institutions. Nous sommes dans un contexte de moralisation de la vie politique et publique et à ce titre nous ne pouvons nous permettre la pratique d’ « étranges factures »

L’octroi par les établissements publics de subventions et de fonds public doit respecter des règles éthiques, morales et de droit.

Rappel : La France compte entre 5 et 8,9 millions de pauvres et le nombre de personnes concernées a augmenté de 600 000 en 10 ans. Dont 3 millions d’enfants sous le seuil de pauvreté…

L’Égalité Nationale a donc saisi la Cour des Compte à ce sujet pour demander des éclaircissements sur cette affaire révélée par le Canard Enchaîné… Plus que jamais il est nécessaire que la République française retrouve pleinement la haute dignité de fonctions…

. Le différentiel entre le montant annoncé et le montant révélé par le Canard Enchaîné est démesuré et soulève de facto de nombreuses questions…Il est temps d’en finir avec ces pratiques d’un « autre monde » : fournir gratuitement des biens et recevoir des fonds publics du même prestataire n’est pas neutre.D’autant que l’Élysée à bien pris soin de facturer via le Ministère de la Culture.

Cette affaire des assiettes est hautement symbolique puisqu’elle renforce l’existence d’une politique injuste de la part du gouvernement, une politique en faveur de plus favorisés, une politique qui ne tient pas compte de la difficulté morale et financière d’une grande partie de la population. Cette pétition fait donc échos à ce que représente la manière de faire du Président de la République…


Le 21 août 2018, 4 913 signatures

Emmanuel Macron qui a été « élu par effraction » dans un contexte de moralisation de la vie politique française aurait dû trancher en vertu du droit et non en vertu des intérêts personnels de son épouse. Les affaires de la vaisselle, de Benalla, de la piscine, du vélo à plus de 4000 euros etc… ne doivent pas occulter les pratiques illégitimes d’un cabinet illégitime au sein de l’Élysée au bénéfice de Brigitte Macron.

La place d’une ou d’une conjointe de président (e) doit être définitivement tranchée, et je n’accepte toujours pas cette hypocrisie inconstitutionnelle qui octroie des privilèges injustes et non démocratiques au nom d’une vielle pratique républicaine. Cette « charte » qui officialise le rôle de l’épouse d’Emmanuel Macron place de facto Brigitte Macron au coeur d’un trafic d’influence et de conflits d’intérêts.

Thierry Paul Valette

Brigitte Macron devait selon son mari avoir un rôle de Première Dame, qui lui permettrait de s’impliquer dans le domaine de l’éducation, de l’handicap, des droits des femmes, et de créer une fondation, ce qui justifiait selon lui son budget annuel de plus de 400.000 euros au frais de l’État. Son cabinet, clamant haut et fort son immense popularité et les milliers de lettres qui lui sont adressées, deux faits qui ne sont en rien prouvés mais participent de la désinformation de la communication présidentielle, avait annoncé son rôle officiel déclarant : ‘elle ne peut s’occuper seulement des nappes et des bouquets à l’Élysée’. Après un an de règne, il semble que toute l’activité notoire de Madame Macron, autre que d’apparaître aux côtés de son mari dans des fonctions officielles dans des toilettes Haute Couture, se résume à la vaisselle et à la décoration intérieure, un rôle bien modeste, même si les deniers de l’État lui confère un statut de mécénat!

Le professeur d’université en droit, Paul Cassia, dresse sur Mediapart un bilan critique et objectif de la première année Macron.

Il offre aux lecteurs un livre électronique sur le sujet, La République du Futur. Penser l’Après Start-up Nation, dont il fournit le lien à télécharger gratuitement.

Dans un dernier article, « La charte de transparence du conjoint du président de la République, un an après »

Paul Cassia démontre de façon irréfutable l’absence totale de toute activité notoire d’intérêt publique, humanitaire ou caritatif de la part de Brigitte Macron depuis un an justifiant le budget exorbitant qui lui est alloué. Il termine ainsi son article: ‘L’acte dit « charte » se termine par ces mots : au titre de sa communication, en plus de la publication (d’une partie) de son agenda sur le site de l’Elysée, Mme Brigitte Macron « effectuera régulièrement un bilan de ses actions ». Pour l’instant, la seule « information » que l’on a bien voulu diffuser est celle, d’un intérêt et d’une précision pour le moins relatifs, contenue dans le communiqué précité du 21 août 2017 : « Madame Macron consacre une grande partie de son temps à répondre aux courriers et sollicitations des Français ». Le premier de ces bilans « réguliers » se fait donc encore attendre. A moins qu’il n’y ait aucun bilan à effectuer puisque, à l’instar des conjoints de tout décideur public, il ne saurait y avoir d’action publique de la part du conjoint du président de la République.’

The Economist jouit d’une haute réputation d’intégrité intellectuelle depuis sa création en 1843, afin de ‘s’investir dans un combat sans merci entre l’intelligence qui progresse sans relâche et une ignorance timide et indigne qui entrave notre avancée’ On est donc en droit d’attendre de la part d’une journaliste, chef de bureau à Paris d’un journal britannique aussi prestigieux, une plus grande objectivité d’esprit et un sens critique plus aiguisé que de relayer in-extenso les fake news de la communication élyséenne et de la presse populaire française.


Paris, le 29 septembre 2018

Antisemitism of the Extreme-Left in the UK.

septembre 4th, 2018

Here’s the latest article from BCiP Chairman Jeremy Stubbs published in the Causeur magazine ( and addressing the antisemitism of the extreme-left in the UK.

JS Causeur antisémitisme RU

Conservative Policy Forum: Health & Social Care – BCiP Response 3/2018

août 4th, 2018

Group name: British Conservatives in Paris

1.  How has your experience of access and care in the NHS changed in recent years?  
One of our members with recent direct experience of hospital services was full of praise for response time & general professionalism encountered.
Another suggested discharge of patients from hospital could take place too quickly.

2. Given the profoundly different landscape of 21st-century healthcare compared to when the NHS was founded 70 years ago, what should the role of the state be?
“The state role should be to ensure a better synergy between the public and private sector, encouraging the development of a deeper and, therefore, cheaper complementary insurance market for private healthcare to enable more companies and individuals to choose this option.”
A major overhaul in the way the NHS is funded is necessary.

3. What more could be done to support individuals and families to take more control of their own health and wellbeing? How might we shift from a system based on treatment to prevention of disease?
Health issues should be included in the curriculum of all pupils.
Parents should be encouraged to bring up their offspring with a healthy lifestyle (cf diet, sports).
One member: families should be required to “invest more in the care of the elderly”.
Public awareness of health issues should be heightened through recourse to various media as well as through actions in hospitals, schools, employers (eg distribution of leaflets).

4. How might we help people to use the NHS responsibly, e.g. not attending A&E for issues that a GP or pharmacy can clearly resolve? How might we reduce the costs associated with the 1-in-15 patients who miss their appointments?
“Larger and combined GP and pharmacy practices could allow 7 days a week working, and more opportunity for people to secure appointments rather than being forced to go to A & E.”
“Operating an on-line appointments service would allow maintenance of a blacklist for serial cases of missing appointments and introduction of a refundable financial penalty when booking future appointments.”
Raise awareness of the sort of problems that can be resolved through a GP or pharmacy.
One member: make the first “port of call” an online advisory system.

5. How could we further raise awareness and tackle the stigma associated with mental ill health?
Inform the public including re recent developments in practice & understanding (eg re depression) – including through television, social media, educational institutions, even employers.
… also re the (significant) numbers of people involved; and cases of successful treatment/overcoming of problems.

6. What kinds of NHS services do you think could be put online/digital rather than traditional face-to-face?
Initial sorting exercises?
Appointments, repeat subscriptions?
One member expressed reservations about recourse to the digital – out of a concern that failures of communication on important items might occur.

7. What more could the NHS do to encourage people to want to work for it? What sorts of practices do you associate with really good employers in other sectors, which the NHS should adopt?
Try to provide for flexible & reasonable working hours at least for those for whom these considerations are important.
Work to develop a professional ethos including through encouragement of suggestions, & through better remuneration (not to mention ensuring professional conduct & due mutual respect eg between doctors & nurses).
Address practical concerns such as the cost of transport/parking/accommodation as related to the location of the hospital etc in question.

8. How might we continue to fund sustainably a growing NHS?
A separate & clearly NHS-labelled tax
More recourse to private insurance complementary coverage: reference to the French model would be instructive & helpful in this regard.

9. As the NHS budget grows, what health services or treatment areas should be prioritised?
More time should be devoted to initial point of entry visits to the NHS to ensure issues are identified up front.
To provide relief to the system, tasks which can properly be assigned to nurses/social care workers should be so allocated.
Preventive medicine should be developed & accentuated.

10. What could be done to raise awareness among working age adults about the risks of future care costs? How should we fund the need for increased social care?
An explicit separate (“ring-fenced”) tax would help.
Similarly a local “ring-fenced” tax for social care would draw attention to these issues.

11. What should be the guiding principles for Conservatives in making these decisions?
Be lucid & rigorous: eg benchmark against other comparable countries/systems.
Respect for the inherent dignity & worth of each human bein.g
Openness to innovation.
Openness to a role for non-state actors.

12. Is there any other question you think should have been asked or observation you would like to make?
More in the way of comparisons to other countries would have been both interesting & illuminating.
The importance of cross-party thinking/consensus-building on such fundamental issues would have deserved some attention.
Pharmaceutical product pricing issues could have usefully been addressed.
The needs of certain specific groups (eg the homeless) might also have been addressed.


What did you find useful?
The international overall ranking chart
Indications on the evolution of the health situation (eg improvements wrt youth smoking, drinking, unwanted pregnancies).

What did you not find helpful?
Overly broad and optimistic policy declamations not particularly helpful in coming to grips with the issues.

Do you have any suggestions for how we might improve future briefings?
This brief was of good quality.
More and more in-depth comparisons with other countries –elsewhere in Europe, elsewhere in the “Anglosphere” or anywhere else– would be both stimulating and relevant from a policy assessment perspective – & this would apply for many different subjects.

CPF 18-3 Response – BCiP

French Politics – A Year Later…….The Reign of President Macron Appraised

juillet 3rd, 2018

BCiP member Monique Riccardi-Cubitt shares her thoughts:

Ever since the beginning of the 2017 presidential campaign I have not ceased, as have also done many others, to alert the opinion as to the potential dangers of Macron’s election and his stooge Brigitte. Their life record based on duplicity, venalty, vulgar seduction and moral corruption rendered them ill-fitted to govern France, and could only bring misfortune to the nation and to its citizens. In several articles published in French and in English on Mediapart and the British Conservatives in Paris’s website, I predicted the social, economic, human and cultural disaster of his future presidency. I quoted Professor Christopher Bickerton, University Lecturer in politics at POLIS and Official Fellow at Queens’ College, Cambridge, who has taught at Oxford, the University of Amsterdam and Sciences Po in Paris. On September 7th 2017 he published an article in The New York Times : Emmanuel Macron Will be Yet Another Failed French President.


Macron has been badly elected by default in surfing on the inner divisions and ancestral fears of the French nation. In capitalizing on the Right Wing’s debacle caused by the corruption and mafia actions of the Sarkozy clan Macron, the self proclaimed Jupiter,  succeeded in seizing the supreme power he and his accomplice wife had so ardently striven for. From the very beginning  he distinguished himself by his erratic misbehaviour, his abusive language, his infringements of the Law and of the Constitution  in pushing through liberticidal anti democratic, anti humanist laws. To such an extent that my prophecy on this state of affairs resulting in a country under a constant State of Emergency that allows the Goverment all possible abuses in repressive and restrive legislation, has become true. Not only have citizens’ civic rights, freedom and privacy shrunk considerably, but the country is in real danger of a civil war. Dark politico-religious, financial and économic forces are at work in an underhand manner. It is their implicit interest that such a catastrophic issue occurs, and the threat looms larger everyday. Such is Macron’s arrogant autocratic rule and his political imposture, that daily the destructive manipulations of the despotic author of the premonitory book Revolution and of his henchmen are becoming more explicit, even if apparently denied. As can be seen in the latest episode when the French Ambassador in Budapest brought support to the government of Viktor Orbàn whose migratory policies are all but similar to those of France. He denounced in a telegram to the Quai d’Orsay,  the true modern antisemitism, that of the Moslems of France and Germany … After its publication on the website of  Médiapart, the online newspaper, on June  29th 2018,  the Ambassador was dismissed and publically disowned by Macron. Yet in a first time he latter had declared not wishing to relieve  him of his post… It is characteristic of Macron’s erratic ambivalent credo : En même temps At the same time, allowing his words to deny the intent and the action, to say one thing and its contrary, to adapt to the changing blowing wind of the current opinion, to build a smokescreen where there should be transparency.


The result can only be disastrous for France and for Europe. Far from being the self-appointed saviour of Europe, the perversely ambiguous narcissic nature of Macron, his venalty, his Sarkozy-like hyperactive and incoherent manner of governing, his neoliberal policies giving priority to the wealthy few, the milliardaire upper-class, to the detriment of the middle and working classes who are nothing according to him, are steadily eroding and destroying the social, cultural and economic fabric of the country with ensuing disastrous results for the European Community at large. The middle and working classes, the very foundation stone of society, are feeling betrayed by Macron and his government. One can easily predict that, as did happen in the United Kingdom with the BREXIT’s fatall issue, this antidemocratic exclusion of the vast majority of citizens by a government sold to the rule of the financial markets and globalisation will breed in time rampant racism. A scapegoat will have to be found to justify the increasing proverty of the country and of its citizens. It will be easy then to accuse the migrants, the Moslems, those of a different religion or skin colour. At the end of this fateful presidency, France will no longer be a harmonious whole, a country united by a shared culture, its badge of honour and glory for centuries. It will be a worn-out country, deprived of its vital creative forces, bled to death by ‘This poverty born of money’ in the words of Joyce Mansour, the British Egyptian poetess who wrote in French. The country will be torn apart with internecine fights, thus denying the best of its cultural heritage based on Greco Roman and Christian values which recognize and welcome diversity in its universality. France will then deny and destroy the European dream and ideal and accomplish a FREXIT.


2018 has been declared the European Year of Cultural Heritage. The Italian Institute in Brussels under the direction of  Paolo Grossi, and with the support of the European Commission, has published a special edition in two volumes of its yearly review Cartaditalia  in four European languages : French, Italian, English and German. It aims to define, acknowledge, and seek the appropriate management to ensure the continuity in time of Europe’s tangible and intangible heritage.  During the presentation at UNESCO’s headquarters in Paris, on March 14th 2018, Pier Luigi Sacco, the scientific editor of the publication has declared ‘ Heritage is what defines our ability to cope with everyday life, to cope with the world’. It is altogether‘ A flexibility to learn from others, and an accumulation of what we have learnt…It is a complex vision of human nature , a source of superpower…’ whereas ‘identity is static, heritage is dynamic’.


The insight and wisdom of those words should inspire and encourage the European Heads of State to ponder on the new impetus to give to the European Union and create a dynamic other than the purely economic and fiancial aspect proposed byMacron.  If they would think in an enlightened humanist perspective taking into account the common past of all Continental countries, as well as of the United Kingdom, the relations with the Balkans, Russia and Turkey would be clarified and simplified. They would become an asset instead of being an obstacle. As in the past under the  Pax Romana  a common vision would unite Western Europe and Eastern Europe, allowing our European culture so rich and so complex to bring forward the values and the ideals that are our very own and have fashioned us through centuries. These values and ideals have been at the source of the New World beyond the Atlantic, yet in time they have diversified. In a rapidily changing world where new centres of power are emerging in Asia, Africa, the duty, the future of Europe, are independent of those of America whose culture owes much to ours. We Europeans have to remember our own values, to project them, to promote them so that the immense common cultural wealth that is ours in diversity, the very essence of the European spirit, might bring forward and carry through a message of peace and humanity.


Paul Cassia, University Professor of Law, has published on Mediapart a critical and objective assessment of Macron’s first year :

He offers to the readers an E-book on the subject, to download free via a link in the article : La République du Futur. Penser l’Après Start-up Nation


Paris, July 1st 2018

The Decline of France – by Monique Riccardi-Cubitt

juin 12th, 2018

France 3 TV Channel is about to release on June 13th a film BRIGITTE MACRON, UN ROMAN FRANÇAIS. It is yet another version of the nauseatingly slushy presidential saga, a tale of the seduction of an under-age pupil by a teacher his mother’s age, a woman without qualms nor ethics, who subjected her own husband to a crushing humiliation, and admits having brought suffering to her children in order to follow with impunity the ambitious plans she projected on a youngster enslaved to her will.

This latest version of a countlessly retold story during the past year and a half,  is aiming to whitewash her reputation and  exonerate her of all guilt since she supposedly acted ‘par amour’ notwithstanding the offence committed in the eyes of the law.  In so doing  it is meant to appeal to the heart of French citizens now that the presidential rate of popularity is plunging  in the opinion polls. Even Macron’s early supporters are denouncing the evil of effects of his social and economic policies, and of the accelerated rhythm of senselessly destructive reforms, dangerously disrupting the country.  It is the worse possible example of the French system of double standards, and a particularly potent symbol of its decadence and corruption.


Monique Riccardi-Cubitt (Countess)
BCiP Member



A By-Election of Importance in Lewisham East – by Peter Huggins

juin 5th, 2018

The 2nd. of March was cold and there had been fresh snowfall. A train with a dozen carriages crawled painfully along the icy tracks in the early evening, each carriage packed with commuters hoping to get home to their dormitories after a day’s toil ending with a difficult trek to the station in a blizzard. Between two stations, the train shuddered and stopped. It did not move for four hours. The passengers were jammed together in intense discomfort. There was no thought of sustenance or a hot drink. Staying upright and surviving was all that could be hoped for. There were no toilets on the train. Movement was anyway virtually impossible for the patient passengers in the packed carriages. At last a mutiny began and passengers disobeyed the instructions of the railway staff to stay put. They opened the emergency doors, streamed out of the train and began to plod through the snow to the nearest station. Trains here are powered from a third rail at ground level. The railway staff were forced to turn this off for fear that a passenger might be electrocuted. The passengers plodded on, their town shoes sodden with the freezing snow. They painfully made their way home, on foot or by bus, where busses were running. The mutiny was uncomfortable but successful.
Public opinion was strongly in favour of the mutineers, not those running the antiquated railway. Where was this train? Was it perhaps the infamous slow train from Minsk to Smolensk? In fact it was the even more infamous North Kent line from London Bridge to Chatham, one of the world’s oldest and least reliable tracks. The train was stranded between Lewisham and Blackheath in South East London in the heart of a constituency about to lose its popular MP, the Labour remainer Heidi Alexander, who had been offered a deputy mayor (transport) job with the Labour ‘remain’ Mayor of London. Commuters to Blackheath and beyond were about to be given a channel for their protests about the railway, Brexit, knife crime and much else in a by-election provoked by Heidi Alexander’s departure.

Voters in the Lewisham East constituency do not have much sense of identity about their arbitrarily drawn up collection of wards. They do have a strong sense of identity with South East London.

On the North, the constituency is bounded by wonderful Greenwich Park with the Royal Observatory, the Naval Museum (Henry VIII’s palace), the ex-RN college, the Seamens’ Hospital and views across the Thames to Canary Wharf, St. Paul’s and beyond. On the East, the A2 leads over Shooters Hill to Kent. This is the Roman road to the coast and Chaucer’s pilgrims’ road to Canterbury£. It makes a straight line through Dickens country with Woolwich, the Royal Artillery and Military Academy on the North along the Thames. Here, in hulks on the river, convicts were assembled for transportation to Australia, sometimes working in Woolwich Arsenal during their wait. On the South of the constituency are the prosperous stockbroker Tudor suburbs of Bromley and Chislehurst. This is the country of Orpington Man, not a cousin of Neanderthal but a phenomenon of the 1960s when the Liberal party had one of its perennial recoveries from extinction. On the West are Camberwell and Deptford, old dockland country now gentrified on the river side. On this fringe of the constituency is the home of Millwall football club. (Song:’ Nobody likes us, we don’t care’.) Its somewhat bellicose supporters easily become agitated, particularly during matches with local rivals Charlton, Crystal Palace and West Ham. Further inland is genteel Dulwich. Like Blackheath, this is a chunk of Hampstead in South London.

The constituency is mixed socially and economically but mostly without extreme wealth or poverty. Lewisham East has rather more people in good jobs than the national average and higher levels of education. The Blackheath ward is prosperous and popular with city workers, civil servants, journalists and academics. A couple of generations ago it was ‘Separate Tables’ territory where retired colonels treated themselves to rock cakes behind the lace curtains of joyless teashops. Now it bustles with boutiques, exotic restaurants, prosperous estate agents and a renowned concert hall. In Blackheath and elsewhere in the constituency, voters worry about the Brexit effect on their jobs. Whether merchant bank high-fliers or Bob Cratchit pen-pushers, as they stand patiently during their interminable train journey from the City, they read in the Evening Standard of yet another Brexit-fearing finance house moving jobs to Frankfurt, Amsterdam, Paris or Dublin. These are people with much spleen to vent and much concern to express in the by-election.

Lewisham East and contiguous constituencies have a venerable political past with local MPs who included Gladstone, Morrison, Callaghan and Rosie Barnes, the Labour schismatic who won Greenwich from Labour and held it for the Social Democrats/LibDems for a dozen years. This is an area of moderate radicalism, unlike Woolwich to the East where there were traditionally many more Daily Worker readers and fellow travellers.

In view of the by-election, the most important characteristic of Lewisham East is the position of its voters on Brexit. This is ‘remain’ country, even more than the rest of London. About two thirds of the constituents voted ‘remain’. A friend in the constituency was recently witness to a heated political discussion in a local pub. A contributor referred to Jeremy Corbyn as a Marxist freak and Boris Johnson as a château bottled charlatan to general approval and amusement. This is not easy territory for the Conservative or Labour party leaderships.

The Labour majority of Heidi Alexander in the General Election was strong at over two thirds of the vote. The candidacy for her vacancy was fought hard and sometimes acrimoniously by two Corbynite Momentum and Unite candidates and a strong ‘remainer’, Janet Daby, committed to the Single Market and Customs Union. She won the candidacy by a large margin and got the ex post endorsement of Corbyn. All three candidates were ladies from ‘minority ethnic groups’, as required by the Corbynite pc doctrine. The LibDem candidate, Lucy Salek, was installed with little competition and backed with a visit from Vince Cable including photoshots at Millwall football ground. The Conservative candidate, Ross Archer, got 23% of the vote at the General Election and is well known in the constituency. He is a respected local party worker who has so far taken a consensual line on Brexit issues.

Especially with her ‘remain’ credentials, it would be surprising if the Labour candidate were to do badly in the contest. Ross Archer, on the other hand, is likely to be strongly contested for second place by the LibDem Lucy Salek. The UKIP candidate got less than 2% of the vote at the General election and is likely to fare even worse this time. There is a plethora of minor party candidates including the inevitable Monster Raving Loony Party which will give voters plenty of choice and some entertainment. The results of the election are likely to draw a flood of analysis and comment because this is a constituency strongly representative of the whole of London and the Home Counties. The election campaign takes place during the brief lull before the Lords amendments to the Brexit Bill come back to the Commons.

An election is worth many opinion polls and June 14th will be a milestone on the long march which began with the Brexit Referendum. The ‘People Have Spoken’ phase is receding and Parliament is back in control and centre stage. Ross Archer has a daunting job. He has to navigate a minefield of difficult issues. To succeed in obtaining the respectable vote which the Conservatives badly need, he has to explain, justify, reassure and cajole on many complex issues. A minimum list would include falling house prices, fragile commuter train services, knife crime, the inadequate police budget, the NHS staffing crisis, the continuing squeeze on real incomes and the Byzantine problems surrounding Lewisham town council attempts to take over and redevelop the Millwall football ground with a shadowy offshore financier.

I join with the Conservatives of South East London in wishing Ross Archer courage, good luck and success in a key contest.

Peter Huggins

The Author, BCiP member Peter Huggins, has deep roots in South East London. He was born in Greenwich, went to Primary school in Woolwich and grammar school in Blackheath. Before moving to work in Paris, Peter and his wife Christa lived in Blackheath on the fringe of Greenwich Park.