A Swedish MP has intervened in a dispute over the deportation of elderly British citizens from Sweden, warning that the removals are damaging bilateral relations with the UK. Häkan Svenneling, an opposition MP for the Left Party, has written to migration minister Johan Forssell demanding to know what he intends to do to stop the deportations of people who have lived in Sweden for decades.
The intervention comes as Joyce Thomas, a 78-year-old British widow, faces removal after 21 years of residency. She was given four weeks to leave Sweden after her appeal against a removal order failed. Thomas, a retired nurse, moved to Sweden with her late husband in 2001 to be closer to their son and grandchildren. She told the Guardian: “I am in shock. I feel sick. An individual’s life is at stake at my age. It is hell. I have done nothing wrong.”
Brexit residency rules and missed deadlines
Thomas and her husband, who died of cancer in 2023, believed they did not need to apply for residency after Brexit. They had checked with authorities and were told no forms were required. However, they missed the 31 December 2021 deadline for applications under the EU-UK withdrawal agreement. Thomas made a late application in 2023, just weeks after returning from the UK, but it was rejected. She is self-sufficient and does not claim Swedish state benefits.
Svenneling, who represents Värmland where Thomas lives, will meet her on Wednesday, exactly a week after her appeal failed. In his letter to Forssell, he argues that the withdrawal agreement was intended to protect existing residency rights for Britons lawfully in Sweden before Brexit. He stated: “It was not intended to result in elderly people who had lived in Sweden for decades losing their rights to remain because of a missed deadline or deficiencies in their application.”
Another elderly Briton affected
Svenneling also raised the case of Horace (George) Mason, 74, who has dementia and Parkinson’s disease and is in full-time care. Mason moved to Sweden 25 years ago to be near his son Carl and grandchildren. He was also given four weeks to leave. His family pursued a second legal route under the European Convention on Human Rights, arguing he had the right to stay close to family he relies on, but the migration court of appeal ruled that “the state’s interest in regulated immigration outweighs Mason’s interest in continuing to reside” in Sweden.
David Milstead, head of the campaign group Brits in Sweden, said the group had raised concerns about Sweden’s approach since 2020. Writing in the Guardian, he noted that safeguards were “untested” and that among genuine missed-deadline cases brought to the group’s 9,000 members, none had been accepted by Sweden.
UK government and EU concerns
The UK Foreign Office said it has repeatedly raised concerns with the European Commission that Sweden is taking a considerably stricter approach to late applications than any other EU member state, with a disproportionate number of refusals. It added that in practice, individuals are not likely to have their reasonable grounds for late applications accepted.
Milstead expressed concern that Sweden’s wider migration policy could be affecting decisions under the withdrawal agreement and called on the European Commission and Sweden to address the issues urgently. He said: “Sweden’s migration politics have moved sharply towards restriction. That cannot displace EU law, but it makes remedial action harder to defend politically.”
The Swedish migration agency declined to discuss individual cases but stated that not knowing a Brexit application had to be made was not a “reasonable ground” to stay. Svenneling’s parliamentary question adds pressure on Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson’s centre-right minority coalition to address concerns over Sweden’s implementation of the legally binding treaty.
