| Submit your comments on this article |
| Europe |
| Britain told to give up its £2.5bn EU rebate |
| 2005-01-14 |
| Anyone who feels inclined to look fondly on the European Project should ask themselves whether they would be happy for the USA to be in Britain's position... The European Commission warned Britain yesterday that it must pay billions of pounds more into its coffers each year or jeopardise the future of the Union. Dalia Grybauskaite, the European Budget Commissioner, told The Times that unless Britain and other big EU countries increased their payments to Brussels over the next seven years, the EU would be unable to provide the skills, technology and infrastructure required to compete in the global market. That, she said, could kill the idea of Europe. So it's ramp up the good old-fashioned Soviet-style wealth redistribution or forget the whole thing? Ooh, that's a toughie... In a clear challenge to the British Government, the former Lithuanian Finance Minister also said that for the greater good of Europe Britain must give up the multibillion-pound annual budget rebate that Margaret Thatcher secured in 1984. The Commission is increasing its pressure on Britain as part of its demands for just over €1 trillion (£700 billion) in member state contributions for the next seven-year budget period which starts in 2007. Time is running out for securing Britain's agreement to a budget that could cost it dear and fuel the country's euroscepticism. Britain takes over the rotating EU presidency in July, and holds its referendum on the new EU constitution next year. Britain's chances of voting to adopt the new Constitution would surely slide from 'Remote' to 'Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha'. Gordon Brown, the Chancellor, has steadfastly rejected a commission proposal to spread the British rebate, currently worth about £2.5 billion a year, around other countries, on the ground that Britain would lose out financially. In total, the demands for bigger contributions and a reduced rebate could cost British taxpayers as much as £5 billion a year. But Ms Grybauskaite, who has a black belt in martial arts and a formidable reputation, gave warning in an interview: "If other member states started to negotiate just on physical amounts of money, you are forgetting solidarity, a core policy of the European Union. If you have bad times, you have been helped. If you have good times, you help others. Those are principles that most of us believe in. If one or another country start to revise it, it jeopardises the future of the EU." The problem with this 'solidarity' thing is some people just always seem to 'need help'. French farmers come to mind, and all others who think that 'prosperity' comes in the form of trucks loaded with no-strings cash from other people's countries... Mrs Thatcher won the rebate — famously demanding "I want my money back" — as compensation because Britain, then one of the poorest countries of the EU, contributed more than any other country. Although each country pays in the same amount as a proportion of its economy, Britain gets less back from the Common Agricultural Policy than France and Italy because its farmers are more efficient. Over the past 20 years, the rebate has brought back €64 billion to Britain, or about €1,000 per citizen. Without it, Britain would have paid 14 times as much as France or Italy to the EU. This is price of out-performing the states who have more lovingly embraced the European Way and are consequently floundering in their own economic failure: the leeches just suck harder. |
| Posted by:Bulldog |
| #7 notice that Aris was afraid to comment on this. Coward and pussy |
| Posted by: Frank G 2005-01-14 10:44:20 PM |
| #6 Let's see, yesterday it was announced that the EP Constitution had been approved. Yet the EU has turned into a nanny union, requiring countries like the UK to support the ailing German and Fench economies. The British should revolt just as the Colonies revolted from the British. |
| Posted by: Captain America 2005-01-14 10:20:38 PM |
| #5 A tovaritch kommisar of the European Socialist Sovietic Republics shows the true colours of the modern Leviathan, yet again: to tax the able, the ambitious, the free -- in order to feed bureaucrats and parasites. |
| Posted by: Kalle (kafir forever) 2005-01-14 5:56:00 PM |
| #4 But Ms Grybauskaite, who has a black belt in martial arts and a formidable reputation, gave warning in an interview: oooh...watch out! |
| Posted by: 2b 2005-01-14 5:04:38 PM |
| #3 Hilarious!! Couldn't come up with a more pointed refutation of socialist redistribution if you tried. Of course the other side of this is the fact that if the "14 times more" rule is enforced, Britain will stop being more efficient and the total pool will dry up. The canonical example is the difference between paying brick layers by the brick or by the day...the former will get you maximum output as everyone lays as many bricks as they can. The latter insures that no one will lay anymore bricks than the smallest number required to get paid. At this point you stop making enough money to pay anyone and you get the good old Soviet axiom.....they pretend to pay us and we pretend to work. Good luck folks, you're gonna need it. 8^) |
| Posted by: AlanC 2005-01-14 1:40:01 PM |
| #2 Without it, Britain would have paid 14 times as much as France or Italy to the EU. WTF? |
| Posted by: Shipman 2005-01-14 1:21:09 PM |
| #1 ROFLMAO!!! Great post, BD! Rules? What rules? Rules are for the suckers, lol! Socialism 101: Drag everyone down to the lowest common denominator. Don't worry, you'll feel good about yourself afterwards, just think of solidarity and lie back and enjoy it. |
| Posted by: .com 2005-01-14 1:11:41 PM |