I cannot believe that the EU want additional funding from the UK because our economy is moving faster than any other country within the EU. Frances public debt has topped two trillion euros for the first time and will soon reach 100 per cent of GDP the official EU limit is 60 per cent. The only time France was in this much financial difficulties was under the Nazis in the 1940s, France is moving from relative decline to complete decline. Hence the famous rant by one of our leading business figures, Andy Street, managing director of John Lewis, who recently described France as sclerotic, hopeless, downbeat and, ultimately, finished. Well today according to the later opinion poll 56% of voters wish to stay in the EU, this opinion poll must have been taken in Paris as the French are getting £790 million rebate paid for my UK tax payers. The real problem the UK have had with the EU, is that they have never really begun to understand its real nature, and what was always intended to be its ultimate goal. Edward Heath knew full well what the EU was really about the plan to weld all Europe together under an unprecedented form of super-government. They deliberately decided to conceal it from us; for fear that our anxieties about our loss of sovereignty might prevent them from being allowed to join. Various reports have been reporting for years on the incredible damage membership of the EU was doing to British life, through thousands of crazy directives and regulations, through the destruction of our proud fishing industry and the undermining of our agriculture, which was until 1973 the most efficient in Europe. The real story, surprisingly, goes back to the 1920s, when a senior League of Nations official, Frenchman Jean Monnet, first began to dream of building a United States of Europe very much on the lines that decades later would shape the EU as it is today. The EU is most commonly discussed in terms of constitutional debates, treaty negotiations, vetoes and votes. Of course, it is absolutely right that the crucial issue of the democratic deficit is addressed, but there are other reasons to be concerned about our relationship with the EU. The vast cost of the EU is foremost among them. As important as questions of sovereignty and freedom are, it would be wrong to discuss the EU without fully investigating the costs it imposes to the taxpayer, the consumer and businesses. The estimate costs are massive. In the EU’s own estimate the total cost to Britain to remain in the EU over £118 billion in ten years, £650 for every person, or £45 million a day. This goes into the central EU budget. The direct contribution to the central EU budget is just the beginning. On top of the cost of funding an army of well-paid bureaucrats in Brussels, the British taxpayer also foots the bill for a hundreds of public servants employed by our own Government to implement the EU’s rules and regulations. With the EU in control of business, trade, environment, agriculture, fisheries, immigration and migration a sizeable portion of each Government department effectively works for Brussels. Of course, that contribution is a gross figure and the EU are always quick to point out that we receive money back from Brussels in the form of grants. On close investigation the UK got back about £60-80 billion in 10 years, Britain is one of the 4 member nations that are a net contributor within the EU each year. The EU imports 40% of UK trading capacity the other 60% is traded within the rest of the global marker outside the EU. The UK imports 60% of all its trading capacity from the EU and 40% outside the EU. I/e in the UK we buy more goods from the EU than the EU buys from the UK and the UK trades more outside the EU than any other member of the EU. This is the main reason why the UK would not join the Euro as we trade more with the rest of the global market. If the UK were not in the EU the EU would still trade with us as we use more EU goods than the EU uses UK goods. This is why many feel we are better trading with the EU but not in the EU. In additional UK PLC would have had an additional £40-60 billion to spend in the UK.
Posted on: Fri, 24 Oct 2014 07:23:30 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015