EU is costing Britain £106K a MINUTE - that's £900 for each man, woman and child in the UK
source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1087944/EU-costing-Britain-106K-MINUTE--thats-900-ma...
-
-
- masliko
- added this
As the UK teeters on the brink of what experts predict will be the most serious financial crisis since the Great Depression, the Government has surrendered £55.8billion to Brussels this year.
That is equivalent to paying a whopping £900 for every man, woman and child in the country.
Cutting back on payments to the EU could fund a 6p cut in income tax, according to a hard-hitting report by the Eurosceptic Bruges Group.
They branded it a 'scandal' that Britain was contributing so much money to the super-state when struggling families were being forced to tighten their belts as recession looms.
UK Independent Party MEP Gerard Batten, who wrote the report for the think-tank, said: 'As we enter what looks like the most serious economic crisis since 1929 membership of the European Union is a luxury that the British people simply cannot afford.
'It is clear that the EU is holding up economic recovery. To get Britain out of recession, we must get Britain out of the EU.'
Robert Oulds, director of the Bruges Group, said: 'There is a desperate need to reinvigorate the British economy by reducing the burden of taxation.
'Slowly, all three main political parties are beginning to realise this but none have come up with a convincing plan as to how this can be done.
'Now that the costs of EU membership have been exposed, we now know that the tax cuts that are so desperately needed can partly be found by freeing us from EU control.'
The report, published today, calculated that the full financial cost to Britain of being part of the EU was £55.8billion - up £400million on the previous year.
This was made up of the Treasury's £4.7billion net contribution to Brussels, plus a £3billion handout to other EU bodies, such as the European Space Agency and the European Investment Bank.
The controversial Common Agricultural Policy costs the UK an additional £16.8billion while the Common Fisheries Policy adds up to another £3.3billion. Some of this is paid direct to the EU, whilst being part of the policies means food on our tables is more expensive.
Finally, red tape imposed by the EU has cost British business about £28billion, according to statistics calculated by the European Commission's vice-chairman Günter Verheugen.
The Bruges Group says that leaving the EU would boost tax revenue and free-up sufficient funds to allow the Government to cut the basic rate of income tax by 6p.
The report was unveiled as the Conservatives blasted the Government's failure to shake up the Common Agricultural Policy.
Ministers gave up £7billion of the UK’s EU budget rebate on the grounds that the farming system would be reformed.
But this did not happen - a failure Environment Secretary Hilary Benn conceded is a 'missed opportunity'.
The Tories also revealed how the Government missed a crucial opportunity to influence the reforms by failing to send a minister to a key European summit on the issue last May.
Shadow agriculture minister Jim Paice said: 'The Government gave up £7billion of taxpayers' money for vague promises of common agricultural policy reform which it has signally failed to achieve.
'The failure to secure sustainable reform comes with a huge price-tag, at a time when the UK economy can ill afford it.'
He said it was 'absolutely indefensible' that UK ministers did not attend the crunch talks.
'The UK should be at the forefront of these talks on the CAP, food security and environmental protection, not just to promote the interests of British farming, but to ensure that EU policy most effectively responds to the challenges of rising demand for food,' he said.
-
- groups:
- News and Politics, Current News UK, Money
-
- tags:
- News and Politics, Economy, Current News UK, Money, 5 more
-
-
dirtyemowords
-
We're all in this economic crisis together, and whilst that figure is extraordinary, I'm pretty sure there are other countries (France, Germany, Spain etc) that are fronting similar amounts.
- 3 years ago
-
dirtyemowords
-
-
purplefox
-
I find it very hard to trust statistics when they're quoted/distorted by parties for a political motive, so I wouldn't be surprised if this figure or the reasons for the spending have been dramatically exaggerated in some way. Having said that, when I read stories about month-long debates and money spent on controlling and regulating the size and shape of cucumbers, I do wonder if the time and money couldn't be put to better use elsewhere.
I reckon red tape seriously needs cutting, but that shouldn't mean cutting out the EU althogether.
- 3 years ago
-
purplefox
-
-
emmahill
-
I heart being in Europe.
- 3 years ago
-
emmahill
-
-
abbym0308
-
I can't imagine that the UK would actually pull away from the EU based on one report from one think tank. That said, if these figures are accurate, it's a big number to swallow, especially considering the financial crisis we're sitting in.
- 3 years ago
-
abbym0308
-
-
nazbags
-
I hope this isn't flaunted around as anti-EU propaganda. I think we'll be on the Euro sooner than we know it ...
- 3 years ago
-
nazbags
-
-
RubberRims
-
I understand the points of view we are all trying to understand. The UK will not pull away from the EU. This is not possible nor is it a credible debate to illustrate.
Our economy is very fragile as we import fare more than we export. If it was not for London and the financial institutions who I might add buildt a good reputation for sound banking, shame about the last 8 years. We might be just another country built from the toils of farmers. It is difficult to know when we will have to join the Euro. Some might say if these financial problems escalate then institutions will continue to borrow from in or outside the EU. I am certin what happens in America over the next 4-6 months will change our view on capitalism and the free market for a generation. This you can count on.
- 3 years ago
-
RubberRims
-
-
netstorm2k8
-
'Shrinking' back from the EU would not be xenophobia, but smart economic sense. The larger the number of independent bodies in an international economy, the higher the general prosperity of all, barring the effects of government restrictions on trade.
It's simple mathematics. When you hamper international trade with collectivist demands for enforced equality, you end up with a lower standard for all.
Didn't people learn anything from the failure of Communism? During the years of the Iron Curtain, the GDP of the USSR and her satellite countries was terribly low, so the citizens stood in bread lines while the controllers lived in opulence.
People are so quick to bind themselves into some perceived unity with others, when they'd be better off in simpler groupings. The smaller, the better.
- 3 years ago
-
netstorm2k8
-
-
mischabarrett
-
How can you trust a political party whose sole policy revolves around a xenophobic shrinking back from the EU? How can you trust the findings of a think tank inspired by the 'Euroscepticism' of Margaret Thatcher, possibly the politician who has wreaked the most damaging legacy for ordinary working people in Britain since the early 1800s? And finally, how can you trust a newspaper whose inward-looking suspicion of the EU extends as far as mocking the Human Rights Act?
This article skirts around the issue of how the Bruges Group figures were arrived at, and spectacularly ignores the benefits, both economic and social, that are reaped from being part of such an international community.
- 3 years ago
-
mischabarrett
