Maybe £6.5 billion seems like small change to you, but that will be our net contribution to the EU next year, and our gross contribution is at least twice that. On May 6th, in The House of Lords, Lord Campbell of Alloway posed a question:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what is the justification for the projected increase in the United Kingdom's net contribution to the European Community Budget to £6.5 billion in 2010-11.
The answers are more than just interesting. Read on and despair. After a particularly poor reply, Lord Campbell said:
As he will know, the Government strove in vain to rectify the unacceptable regime of the EC, where the contributions to which the noble Lord referred are projected from accounts that cannot be justified, for reasons that were spoken to on 31 March. What are we to do about it-if we are not to walk away-other than apply to the federal court to seek to establish a reformed regime, acceptable to the Court of Auditors, which will give us a statement of assurance on the accounts so that the increases can then be justified?
To which:
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, as the noble Lord did last time, when he asked a similar Question, he analyses the problem without producing a particularly constructive or helpful solution to it.
A selection of comments follow (remember this is your taxes that they are talking about):
Lord Waddington: My Lords, does the noble Lord agree that there is one obvious reason for the increase in our contribution: the surrender by Tony Blair of part of our rebate, which he solemnly promised only two years earlier that he would never give away?
Lord Davies of Oldham: Yes, my Lords, but is the noble Lord not guilty of straining at a gnat? Is it not the case that in terms of overall public expenditure in Britain by the Government, the rebate is a fractional point of 1 per cent of that?
Lord Lea of Crondall: My Lords, is it not the case that the thesis, "We want our money back", is demeaning for a country in our position in the world after the G20 and all the commitments that we have entered into?
And on The Conman Agricultural Policy (I like that typo)
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, the noble Lord will accept that there have been some improvements with regard to the CAP, but he is right that the reforms that have taken place in Europe fall far short of the ambitions of this country for a significant reform of the CAP which carries all the hallmarks of economies several decades past. The Government stay committed to the position that they intend to strive for reform of the CAP as soon as we can obtain it.
Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: My Lords, we are in the ninth minute. It is time to move on to the Question on chronic pain.
And I thought that that was what was being discussed.
Hat Tip - Helen of EUReferendum "No, no, we must not press for reform". Her comments are well worth reading
Wonderful stuff, you really couldn't make it up if you tried !
"Lord Lea of Crondall: My Lords, is it not the case that the thesis, "We want our money back", is demeaning for a country in our position in the world after the G20 and all the commitments that we have entered into?"
It is this attitude more than any other really bothers me because it is a disillusion. Whatever we were 100 years ago before we had to sell off the family jewels to fight two World Wars, it is not where we are today and his Lordship is guilty of having Champagne tastes but only beer money.
People forget that the period of "Empire" was very short lived in our history. For the majority of our time we have been a highly successful small maritime trading nation with the ability to cut up rough as required.
We do not need to belong to the EU and unlike his Lordship, it is not beneath my dignity to brawl like the Fishmongers Wife with the French if that is what it takes.
No you couldn't. The HOL is a rich vein of ridiculous but fascinating comments. There are also some very dedicated Peers in there, that, with no or little financial reward, fight hard for Britain's Sovereignty, democracy and individual freedoms.