The European Union is costing us more each day

First topic message reminder :

EU membership now £50m a day
Wednesday, 23rd November 2011

UKIP analysis of the latest figures contained in The Pink Book 2011 (UK's Balance of Payments) clearly show that the UK now sends in excess of £50million every day in contributions to the European Union.

Figures released today for 2009/2010 show that the UK's gross contributions have increased by 5.7%

Gross receipts (payments from Brussels to the UK) shrank between 2009 and 2010. Part of the reason for this was Tony Blair's surrender of the UK's rebate from the EU.

Our net contribution to the EU has rocketed from £6.6billion in 2009 to £10.3billion in 2010.

Last year the Office for Budget Responsibility envisaged £10.3billion as the annual cost of EU membership for 2014. These new figures show that they have grossly underestimated the cost to the UK of EU membership.

The Pink Book 2011 is a summary of balance of payments accounts, which contain detailed statistics for the current account including; trade in goods and services, income, current and capital transfers, transactions in UK external assets and liabilities, and levels of identified assets and liabilities.

Numbers contained in The Pink Book are higher than those from HM Treasury because not all UK payments to and from Brussels transit via HM Treasury. For example, the Department for International Development channels part of its 'overseas aid' direct to institutions by-passing HM Treasury.

Nigel Farage, UKIP Leader, said: "The figures speak for themselves. We are paying more than ever before for our EU membership and are getting less in return.

"This news is a kick in the teeth for the British people who are tightening their belts in these tough times.

"David Cameron has ignored the will of the people by denying them a referendum on the UK's membership of the EU, and now these figures will just rub salt in the wounds. How can the Prime Minister still say it is within our interests to remain in the EU?"

That's an interesting idea Ivan - Democracy via internet instead of Parliament.

It is also well highlighted that those who are running the E.U. are all unelected. As our UKIP gentleman Farage and others have been saying. How can a public vote them out if they themselves choose behind closed doors the governing group?

Incredible !?

It is also well highlighted that those who are running the E.U. are all unelected. As our UKIP gentleman Farage and others have been saying.

So MEP's don't do anything for their pay and that includes Farage, So why is he still collecting it and his allowances?

So MEP's don't do anything for their pay ....

They presumably got the idea from the City's "Non-executive Directors" who attend a Board Meeting four times a year and trouser <£100,000 for their trouble.

So MEP's don't do anything for their pay and that includes Farage, So why is he still collecting it and his allowances?

It is quite understandable to need finances to travel while getting ones point across a mass of people,but what he has also advocated in several interviews I believe: is political suicide for any MEP career. Especially when Farage said "they should all be sacked", including himself! Disband.

I myself am not a voter of Farage, but he does have interesting view points.

Pixillate their faces on TV and most people couldn't tell the difference between Boris, Nigel or David.

Pixillate their faces on TV and most people couldn't tell the difference between Boris, Nigel or David.

Yes they do sometimes sound the same with the same promises too.. Reminds when happening to catch a music video,I just don't know who the hell they are.Always some new face but they all sound the ruddy same!? Rise of the clones sounds fitting somehow.

Why is he still collecting his allowances?

Back in 2009, Farage was calling on voters to punish "greedy Labour, Conservative and Lib Dem MPs" in the elections to the EU Parliament.

During a debate about Europe at the Foreign Press Association, which was discreetly taped by the hosts, Farage admitted he’d claimed “pushing £2 million” in expenses since becoming an MEP ten years earlier. He insisted he had not "pocketed" the money but had used the "very large sum of European taxpayers' money" to help promote UKIP's message that the UK should get out of the EU. Farage said that the money – intended to cover necessary expenses for an MEP – “had been used for the best of causes”.

The ‘Evil Union’ will certainly cost us more each day if MEPs like Farage claim expenses to finance their parties.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/may/24/mps-expenses-ukip-nigel-farage

I myself am not a voter of Farage, but he does have interesting view points.

I’m not sure that “interesting” is the word I’d use, but details of UKIP policies besides withdrawal from the EU can be found using the link below. Most of the policies sound to me like a wish to turn the clock back to an age which has long gone.

https://cuttingedge2.forumotion.co.uk/t799-is-it-time-that-we-took-a-closer-look-at-ukip

Let's be honest here, Farage (like him or lump him) is the only politician ever to want his job disbanded for the benefit of the country, we could do with a few more like him.

" Let's be honest here...

Steady on! This is no moment to break the habit of a lifetime...

tlttf wrote:Let's be honest here, Farage (like him or lump him) is the only politician ever to want his job disbanded for the benefit of the country, we could do with a few more like him.

He only wants it disbanded until it's actually in danger of happening. It's a cynical tactic in the hope of getting a more juicy job and distracting from a more sinister agenda.

Let's be honest here, Farage (like him or lump him) is the only politician ever to want his job disbanded for the benefit of the country, we could do with a few more like him.

tlttf. A number of Labour politicians over the years have agreed to go to the House of Lords in the hope that they could vote for its abolition. Presumably the Scottish Nationalist MPs at Westminster will vote for Scottish independence next year, which, if successful, will put them out of work for what they consider to be the “benefit of their country”.

We don’t need any more people like Farage, thank you. The man is a fraudster who mis-claimed £2 million in expenses so that he could finance his grubby little party. He associates in the EU Parliament with racists and people who like mass murderers such as Anders Breivik, and he supports misogynists like the UKIP MEP Godfrey Bloom. Perhaps you haven’t yet had a chance to read the following thread and its links:-

https://cuttingedge2.forumotion.co.uk/t799-is-it-time-that-we-took-a-closer-look-at-ukip

If you find a UKIP proponent bending your ear about the Party's brilliance, it might be amusing to get their reaction to the 13% "increase in London prime property prices" which for a foreign Investor actually means a 1% reduction of the cost to them in Euros.

How long can we survive a consistently falling Pound?

Is this what Labour and other europhiles want, or is it perceived as the pinnacle of the socialist dream that all should aspire to. Personally I think it's a f*cking joke being paid for by me and other working people.


Baroness Ashton to leave with £400,000 for doing nothing
EUROCRAT Baroness Ashton will be paid £400,000 from taxpayer funds when she quits her Brussels post next year.
Published: Sat, April 6, 2013

Baroness-Ashton-will-be-paid-400-000-from-taxpayer-funds Baroness Ashton will be paid £400,000 from taxpayer funds

The EU foreign affairs supremo, whose five-year term in office ends next October, will be paid £133,500 a year until the end of 2017 for doing nothing.

Under EU rules she will be paid the cash as a “transitional allowance” based on 55 per cent of her basic salary.

The Labour peer will not have to carry out any duties to receive the cash and will be taxed at a reduced EU rate rather than paying UK income tax. EU officials insisted the allowance was necessary to guarantee the “total independence” of EU commissioners.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/389777/Baroness-Ashton-to-leave-with-400-000-for-doing-nothing

tlttf. Yawn. I heard this story on the 8am news and guessed that it would be posted here this morning. I even knew who would post it, the hypocrite who praises Farage but ignores the fact that he misclaimed £2 million in expenses from the EU.

This has nothing to do with Labour or “socialist dreams”, so you can shove your snidey comments somewhere that the sun doesn’t shine. These expenses are paid to every retiring EU commissioner, regardless of their party affiliations or nationality. A more honest poster might have acknowledged that fact.

A more honest poster might also have explained why this money is paid out. In the first eighteen months after standing down, a retiring commissioner is not allowed to take any post which does not meet with EU approval. Apparently, the payment is intended to ensure that commissioners who are soon to retire don’t spend their last months in office looking for new posts.

These financial arrangements aren’t decided by the Labour Party but are fixed with the agreement of the 27 member states. Perhaps if we had a government that got fully involved with the EU processes, instead of threatening to leave because its leader is terrified of his extreme right-wing backbenchers, then outrageous practices such as these pay-offs - and Farage’s expenses' claims - might be stopped.

There is no need for you to say the same thing three times in one short message, and if you swear in any future posts they will be deleted without further explanation.

My point exactly Ivan, the fact I used a labour mep makes no difference. It simply highlights the fact that we're paying for a worthless group of pocket liners. It's also why I posted on the europe forum rather than the general politics.

As to Farage, if he hadn't come out and told eveybody about the costs being paid, none of the other greedy b*stards would have, ask that nice Kinnock family about it.

I wonder what the pay off is for a MEP when they are either voted out or become a MP in their own country.......

Oh wait they can carry on hold both positions and claim pay from both......

When will Farage stand down from being an MEP?

the fact I used a labour mep makes no difference

tlttf. Firstly, this issue is about EU commissioners, not MEPs.

Secondly, you started this discussion by making it a party political issue, when it isn't:-

Is this what Labour and other europhiles want, or is it perceived as the pinnacle of the socialist dream that all should aspire to.

Now you mention the Kinnocks! All Tory and Lib Dem MEPs and ex-commissioners will take the same money from the EU gravy train, but they don't do so specifically to give to their parties as Farage did.

"Shades of Grey" might be a good title for a book about Brussels politics.

tlttf wrote:-
It simply highlights the fact that we're paying for a worthless group of pocket liners.

.....one of the biggest of whom is your friend Nigel Farage, who is a member of the EU Fisheries Committee but has only bothered to turn up to one out of thirty meetings:-


Source: YouTube

Nigel is now demanding equal time with Clegg/Cameron/Miliband in any broadcast TV debate(s) during the next two years. The Pub Bore you can't get away from.

It will surely be a welcome element of the proceedings : there will be Cameron , irritated beyond measure by Farage's presence; then there will be Clegg , seeking to deny in the face of Cameron that he ever wanted to be part of the dirty dealings which the Coalition have inflicted, while the puffed-up Farage himself waxes lyrical in a manner which will make him look like the ultra-Tory complete prat which he so obviously is.

That just leaves the helpfully-detached Ed Miliband, who will, accordingly, have every opportunity to show Britain just why he and his sparkling Opposition are the chaps for the job. He will take his chance...... won't he.....?

Phil. The picture you portray is of three right-wingers in any discussion plus Ed Miliband, which hardly sounds balanced. The BBC has helped to create the UKIP monster, partly by putting Farage on ‘Question Time’ thirteen times in just over three years, more than any other individual.

But let’s not forget that UKIP has no MPs at Westminster, controls no councils and in the last general election secured 3% of the vote. The Green Party, which has an MP and runs Brighton Council, is, in my opinion, far more entitled to a place in any discussions than the bumptious Farage.

What's wrong with right wingers? UKIP according to the polls has a higher % of the voters wanting them nationally than the Greens so why shouldn't they be on the TV, as I understand it they're even nicking labour voters as they're the only party that recognise the problems facing the country.

tlttf. Good to see you here, at least because it nails the lie that you had been permanently banned.

So you think that the right to take part in a debate should depend on the latest opinion polls, do you? Presumably if UKIP drop a few percentage points with YouGov then they would lose that right, at least until a more favourable poll appears? That’s just nonsense.

The criteria used for the 2010 debates was that the leaders had to represent UK-wide parties (ruling out the SNP and Plaid Cymru) which were represented in Parliament. That meant just the Tories, Labour and the Lib Dems (with 62 MPs before the last election) were eligible. If that rule applies again, UKIP has no eligibility. The debates are about forming the UK government, and UKIP has no MPs at Westminster. It doesn’t even control any councils. I don’t advocate opening up the debates to the Green Party, but it has more eligibility to take part, since at least it has an MP.

Your tired cliché that UKIP is “the only party that recognise the problems facing the country” is just laughable. Leaving the EU in order to protect bankers’ bonuses and make it easier to scrap employment rights will not help this country, neither will bringing back foxhunting and smoking in pubs. Restricting immigration is already damaging cash-strapped universities, while doubling the prison population and spending 40% more on defence - at the same time as dropping the top rate of tax to 31% - is economic lunacy. But if you really want to defend UKIP’s crap policies, this isn’t the thread on which to do it, try this one:-

https://cuttingedge2.forumotion.co.uk/t799-is-it-time-that-we-took-a-closer-look-at-ukip

QUOTE: ".... Restricting immigration is already damaging cash-strapped universities...."

Oh, but they think they've got that covered!

IMMIGRANTS would be forced to bid thousands of pounds to secure visas under controversial proposals by a group of Tory MPs to control the number of people coming to Britain.

http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/Politics/article1268200.ece

But don't we want to discourage the rich foreigners from settling in London and inflating property values?
I thought the point of immigration was to add to the workforce (especially people from poor countries who will work for peanuts)
Tories could be shooting themselves in the foot with this proposal - plus, unlikely to help the Universities

Strangely enough boatlady apparently universities are over prescribed at the moment by 7%. Allowing immigrants to work for less than the minimum wage puts to bed the labour lie to "a living wage", how is allowing somebody from a different country to take jobs from local unskilled workers good. Weird world innit.

IMF's euro swindle

The IMF yesterday confirmed one of the world’s worst kept secrets: it deliberately bent its own rules to bail out the Greek economy because it wanted to help shore up the euro.

As the Mail argued at the time, the £93billion rescue package – which included £1billion from the UK taxpayer – was a shocking abuse of the IMF’s remit.

Its role is to help countries that lack the economic means to survive – not to prop up the failing Franco-German euro ideology so beloved of the IMF’s boss, the scandal-hit ex-French finance minister Christine Lagarde.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2337193/EPHRAIM-HARDCASTLE-Labour-Eds-dont-it.html

Oh do try to find something else to quote from - Daily Mail is OK, but only one version of the facts and strongly coloured by right wing bias - as you know very well

tlttf wrote:-
Strangely enough boatlady apparently universities are over prescribed at the moment by 7%.

Any evidence to support that assertion? No, I thought not.

If university courses are oversubscribed (we’ll leave the prescribing to doctors), it’s because so many courses were cut when fees were trebled. ‘The Daily Telegraph’ reported a record fall in university applications for this coming October: “In total 145,000 applications were received for all courses at UK universities by November 2012. This compares with more than 180,000 at the same stage in 2010, the year before the introduction of the new fees regime.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/9708905/Record-fall-in-UK-university-applications-for-2013.html

However, ‘The Guardian’ reported a 4.9% rise in applications to UK universities from EU countries, and a 9.6% rise from countries outside the EU.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2013/jan/30/university-applications-subjects-age-gender-country

It seems that increasing numbers of foreigners, but fewer British citizens, can afford to go to our universities. However, if I’ve understood correctly, UKIP’s plan to stop all immigration to the UK for at least five years, regardless of what damage that might do to the economy, would cover foreign students as well. If so, it's just another example of the ill-thought-out, crackpot policies of that ridiculous party.

Here we go again, well it makes me smile.

EU must be joking: EC clamps down on fraud
Theresa May has agreed with the EC on proposals to prevent fraud against the EU. The problem is that no one seems to care about the EU’s own fraud and incompetence

Simon Miller
On 7 June 2013 16:14

Fresh from its latest attempt at destroying London as a world financial centre with its grab at the Libor, the European Commission had a tête-à-tête with Justice and Home Affairs Ministers about financial crime committed against the European Union.

Read the article and take a reality check.

http://www.thecommentator.com/article/3744/eu_must_be_joking_ec_clamps_down_on_fraud

tlttf. You take your own "reality check".

Fraud can occur in any organisation, large or small, because not everyone is honest. It's no reason to disband the organisation, and in most cases, it may not be a reason to leave it, just to reform it. The negativity about the EU that you enjoy plastering on this site is purely the result of prejudice. You've decided that the EU is 'bad', so you grub around for every morsel that appears to discredit it.

All you're demonstrating is that you've been brainwashed by years of tabloid anecdotes and that you fail to see what's going on. The far right want to make it easier to scrap human rights; the European Court of Human Rights falls under the jurisdiction of the Council of Europe, but if we left that we'd probably have to leave the EU as well. They also want to make it easier to scrap employment rights, and they want to protect City bonuses. The idea that a bonus might be restricted to just one year's salary caused outrage from Cameron and Boris Johnson and sent them rushing off to Brussels. That's the agenda that you've allowed yourself to be duped into supporting.

I call it fraud when the leader of UKIP takes £2 million in expenses from the EU, yet he has the fifth worst attendance record out of 754 MEPs. Presumably you think that's okay, because public school City toff Farage is so different from other politicians, isn't he?

Maybe, if there is a lot of fraud and corruption in the EU (I don't know) the likes of Nigel Farage and other MEP's should be being a bit more proactive in attending debates, committees etc in order to challenge corruption where it arises, rather than taking huge amounts of expenses in exchange for campaigning against the very organisation that gives them their political platform and a very generous living?

Lets get out of the EUSSR while we still have a bit of money left. Who in their right head wants to stay in an institution that looks continuously for new ways to steal from the working man/woman?


Card fees to be introduced for British customers following EU rule change

As
hidden fees for transactions look set to be scrapped, Mastercard tells
customers the cost will be passed on to them
Adam Withnall

Tuesday 02 July 2013

British customers will be hit with charges on new debit and credit cards if a proposed European Union rule is allowed to come into force, transaction firm Mastercard has warned.

The rule is supposed to clamp down on the fees taken by Mastercard and Visa every time a transaction is made using their cards, but these firms say their losses will ultimately be passed on to consumers.

That could mean a fee of £11 for every new debit card, and as much as £25 for credit cards, as the international companies look to cover estimated losses of £2.4 billion.


http://www.independent.co.uk/money/loans-credit/card-fees-to-be-introduced-for-british-customers-following-eu-rule-change-8683388.html

Cash is King - and untraceable.

Why should anyone choose to allow their Bank to possess a tracking device which records everything they buy and everywhere they go?

.... and how difficult they find it to repay.

tlttf wrote:-
Who in their right head wants to stay in an institution that looks continuously for new ways to steal from the working man/woman?

130,000 Tory Party members maybe?  
 
I see that the EU is such a terrible organisation that a 28th country joined it yesterday. But I suppose Croatians are all just ‘Johnny Foreigners’ who don’t understand anything, are they? In the meantime, your case for leaving the EU now seems to be based on a debit and credit card renewal charge which might come into force one day!
 
A week ago, I was in Strasbourg for one night (not much chance of seeing Farage there, bearing in mind his attendance record). I used a credit card three times – in a supermarket, in a restaurant and to pay a hotel bill. I’ve checked online and to each transaction has now been added a 'non-sterling' fee of 2.75%.
 
According to your article, “the UK Office of Fair Trading has supported the European Commission, which believes the so-called ‘interchange fees’ charged to both customers and retailers are in violation of legal and ethical rulings on transparency”. So in future, non-sterling transaction fees, such as the ones I will be paying, could disappear, but there might be a charge for having the card instead. And is that supposed to make us rush out and support UKIP, which seems to have no price-cutting proposals?
 
Before making any more knee-jerk reactions to a non-story, I suggest you return to the article and study some of the informed reader comments beneath it. Here are a couple of them:-
 
“The EU is proposing to reduce transaction charges - applied every time a card is used - for the ultimate benefit of consumers throughout the 28 member countries.”
 
“This is just the sort of thing we need the EU to meddle with. Who else can stand up to companies the size of Visa and Mastercard? You don't seriously think chain-smoking, pint-swilling, bankster-loving Nigel Farage would stand up to the usurers do you? He is one of their own. The banksters are funding UKIP!”
 
Is it time for you to go back to the drawing board?

Ok then Ivan, the bank no longer charges the company a transaction fee (easy bit). Do you seriously believe that the company your spending your money in will reduce their price and pass on the savings (easy no). So you pay the same amount and the company gains because they don;t pay a transaction fee. Meanwhile the card holder ends up paying a yearly fee for using the card (debit or credit). That would be me paying extra for buying the same item. Now I'm not sure about your drawing board but on mine that's a lose, lose, lose scenario. I'm sure you think it's a beneficial cost to yourself, me I think it's a rip off.

Lets see if Croatia is a net payer or a net receiver Ivan. If I joined a club and had to pay £100 to join (not a real figure) and then the club allows me to spend £1,000 because I'm a member it's a good deal. Is Britain getting the same deal?

Lets get out now, it's past it's sell by date and consumes too much to make it feasible anymore.

tlttf. Until last year, I found that you often received a better rate of exchange if you paid by credit card when abroad. It was also usually best to conduct the transaction in the local currency if given the choice. Since last year, Mastercard has spoiled that by adding a 2.75% “non-sterling transaction fee” every time one of their cards is used abroad.
 
A few points to note:-
1. According to your article from ‘The Independent’, the idea of an annual fee for having a credit card is only a proposal, it may never come into force.
2. Our Office of Fair Trading is supporting the European Commission on this proposal, so maybe the ‘blame’ should be laid a bit nearer home?
3. If a credit card fee of £11 a year replaced Mastercard’s “non-sterling transaction fee”, anyone spending more than £400 a year on their card while abroad would be better off.
4. If we were using the same currency as other countries that we visit in Europe, there couldn’t be any “non-sterling transaction fees”, but I’m not advocating joining the euro.
5. Annual credit card fees were tried about 20 years or so ago. The TSB refused to impose them, lots of people switched to them, and so the other banks withdrew their fees.
 
You can hardly claim that the EU is “past its sell-by date” when it’s still growing. I doubt if Croatia will receive anywhere near ten times what it pays in, but you make me think of that old cliché about knowing the price of everything but the value of nothing. I don’t think you can put a price on our membership of the biggest free trade area in the world. I don’t think you can quantify the effects of American companies basing themselves in the UK so that they can gain free access to that market, and what might transpire if we left it.
 
Until about a year ago, I was a ‘don’t know’ when it came to the EU, as can be seen on some of these threads. I still don’t support its line on austerity, but I do think it provides a degree of protection for the employment rights of our workers. It seems that it’s because of those rights that right-wing Tories and UKIP want to leave the EU, and that they also want to make it easier to protect the bonuses of City bankers. In short, right-wing politicians have convinced me that staying in the EU is by far the safest option in an increasingly globalised world, and I’ve yet to hear a decent reason for leaving. What may or may not happen to my credit card certainly isn’t that reason.

The Business view:

"British business: We need to stay in the European Union - or risk losing up to £92bn a year
Richard Branson and Martin Sorrell among signatories to a letter to ‘The Independent’ that takes aim at Eurosceptics."


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/british-business-we-need-to-stay-in-the-european-union--or-risk-losing-up-to-92bn-a-year-8622925.html

EU rules will still be 'foisted' on Britain if we leave
 
Norway is not a member of the EU but is part of the single market through the European Economic Area Agreement. In return for its membership of the EEA, Norway pays more than £560 million a year, but has no say in any EU decision making.
 
The Swiss have a free trade agreement, which is based on 120 bilateral agreements. It would take Britain time to create a similar labryinth of agreements, which would leave businesses facing a lengthy period of uncertainty. Even if similar agreements were put into place, they would give Britain only limited flexibility.
 
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/10160083/EU-rules-will-still-be-foisted-on-Britain-if-it-leaves-Europe.html

Not since the withdrawal of The Romans 1500 years ago has anyone succeeded in uniting Europe. There may be a message there.

This is part of what the Polish Foreign Secretary, Radek Sikorski, had to say about British Eurosceptics last year:-
 
“Some want out but not entirely. By replacing membership with a negotiated free trade agreement, they argue that the UK will be better off. Because Britain’s market is too valuable for the rest of the continent to ignore, they say, the British government could negotiate a trade deal that would preserve all the advantages of membership in the single market, without any of the political and financial costs.

My answer to that is: don’t count on it. Many European states would hold a grudge against a country which, in their view, had selfishly left the EU. While you are an important market for the rest of the EU, accounting for about 11% of the rest of the EU’s trade, your trade with the EU is 50% of your total trade. No prizes for guessing who would have the upper hand in such a negotiation.

Any free trade agreement would have a price. In exchange for the privilege of access to the Single Market, Norway and Switzerland make major contributions to the EU’s cohesion funds. They also have to adopt EU standards – without having any say in how they are written. At the moment, Norway’s net contribution to the EU budget is actually higher, per capita, than Britain’s.

So think hard: the EU is a market of 500 million people who enjoy the highest average standard of living in the world. According to the IMF and the World Bank, Europe’s GDP is about 2.5 times than that of China and nine times that of India. Do you want to lose your privileged access to that market?”
 
For the entire article:-
http://www.msz.gov.pl/resource/ff80e9c3-19f6-460c-9921-c73bbb089c54:JCR