Don't blame the ref?
Whose fault is it that £200m-worth of European Union money (yes, your money) has been misspent in Britain?
It's that time of year again when the auditors go through the EU's books and we have a grand battle of interpretation.
The European Court of Auditors say for the first time in 14 years they have given a clean bill of health for the accounts - even though there are still too many errors.
But it is also a hardy annual red letter day for opponents of the European Union.
UKIP says of the court of auditors report that "the ECA is a European institution and therefore has been politicised in order that it sanitise the devastating truth about the accounts".
The European Commission argues that the mistakes are, on the whole, minor ones, and are largely errors in the paper trail rather than fraud. They are talking about things like bad form-filing, timesheet-keeping and so on. Out of 180 case studies the court found two examples of possible fraud.
The commission argues it is down to the governments of the countries that make up the EU. It is their job to look at how the money is being spent, and make sure it is all happening properly.
One commission source says it's rather like a game of football where the players commit the fouls but the ref gets the blame. But, he adds, the commission's increasingly showing the red or yellow card to offenders.
The commission is trying to claw back £190m that has been misspent in Britain. It is extremely difficult to get examples of what exactly has gone wrong: the commission feels it's unfair to highlight projects which may in themselves have been a success.
But money has, according to the commission, been misspent in South Wales, Greater Manchester, the Highlands and Islands of Scotland, North East England and Northern Ireland. The sort of project range from renovation of docklands to link-up projects between universities.
The pressure group Open Europe does not accept this. "The responsibility for this spectacular failure lies partly at the door of member states, but overwhelmingly with the commission," it says.
"Until Byzantine spending schemes such as the CAP and Structural Funds are fundamentally reformed, or scrapped altogether, fraud will continue."
They've also given some interesting examples of what they say is fraud.
The commission says many of these examples are plucked from newspapers, and are inaccurate.
I’m Mark Mardell, the BBC's North America editor. These are my reflections on American politics, some thoughts on being a Brit living in the USA, and who knows what else? My 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~59~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
MARK,
What about the EU funding of pro-EU NGOs, their projects/initiatives around Europe which basically is free misspent money for doing nothing except extravagant lifestyle with EU money, and produce some pro-EU propaganda?
Complain about this comment
Which is the best way to shut up your critics?
Tell them that I have misspent (100)billions of Euros of our money, but you also have misspent (100)millions of which I gave you and incourage you to misspent so when this time comes we both are guilty.
Complain about this comment
Mark,
I have followed the link you gave to "Open Europe" and I find it quite concerning that "Open Europe believes that the EU must now embrace radical reform based on economic liberalisation".
http://www.openeurope.org.uk/about-us/
Isn't 'economic liberalisation' what gave us the Credit Crunch? Either this organisation needs to redefine its aims or it is highly suspect.
Complain about this comment
The ECA has approved the accounts? Oh dear, there goes the Europhobes' oldest, dearest chestnut...
To steal a sheet from their own book: why is such momentous news not reported elsewhere by the Beeb?
Complain about this comment
Mark,
I see the ECA is advertising for the post of Secretary-General for the ECA as this Report is published. Is there any connection with the vacancy occurring as the Report is published?
I notice the Report finds that the European Union distributed at least 4.9billion (GBP) in error last year according to the ECA and yet they can finally sign off the EU Commission's accounts for the first time in 14 years.
As much as 92 per cent of the budget, worth 93billion (GBP) in 2007, continued to be tainted by "too high levels of illegality and irregularity" according to the ECA.
The ECA Report has identified extensive shortcomings in the administration of funds.
But, for the first time ever, the auditors noted that, finally after 14 years, the European Commission had finally managed to put together reliable accounts of the EU's financial position.
Whoopee-doo! I wonder if the Secretary-General vacancy occurred as the former encumbent resigned under duress in order to get this Audit approved?
Complain about this comment
Generally speaking, Eu audit in common with all audits is shutting the door after the horse has been stolen. However, all power to the auditors to make a proper job of it. What surprises me is the continual moaning in the UK against the EU when its British National, Regional and local governments at fault, NOT the EU, which is a very conventient scapegoat!. As to the number of employees in EU institutions , the total number is less than that employed by, for example, the Scottish office or just one of the UK civilian ministries. And over 50% are translators (though their number has not increased despite the number of member countries has). I live in Poland. The role of EU auditors is much appreciated by ordinary Poles as they are a Sword of Damocles over missuse of funds by local politicians and civil servants.
Complain about this comment
Mark Mardell should be more worried about the dodgy messenger getting blamed than the so-called referee. If the EU Commission is a referee when it makes the spending decisions, then Roman Abromovitch is the referee at Chelsea games.
Complain about this comment
Open Europe have some interesting examples indeed - are really 2/3 of all cases in Italy??
But "Open Europe is an independent think tank set up by some of the UK’s leading business people to contribute bold new thinking to the debate about the direction of the EU" hardly sounds like they had the best interest of the people of Europe at heard either.
Rather a lobby group which wants to take all the advantages (free markets, subsidies...) and run. No thanks, I'm not interested in their opinion nor their 'liberalised world economy' dementia...
Complain about this comment
karolina001 @ 1 has a good point:
("What about the EU funding of pro-EU NGOs, their projects/initiatives around Europe which basically is free misspent money for doing nothing except extravagant lifestyle with EU money, and produce some pro-EU propaganda?"
Also, check out any piece of research funded with EU money: in the summary of recommendations you'll normally find something along the lines of ".... and further research into this subject should be undertaken..." which when translated means: commission us to do more 'research' paid for by EU taxpayers.
And so it goes around.
Complain about this comment
The UK must get out of this failed eu quango. It is a farce and we should not be associated with it. Lord Mandelson should be ashamed to have been involved with it.
Complain about this comment
Oh dear. They made such an effort to explain things this year and still noone understands.
Yes the accounts are signed off as an accurate record of simply how much money has came in and how money went out. The auditors have always signed off the accounts as an accurate record like that- no change there except that now they are doing it on an 'accruals' bsais (taking account of money spent but prepaid and of liabilities incurred but not yet paid).
(I know it is primitive that the EC has only just started to account on an accruals basis when the private sector has been doing it for a hundred years - but National Governments have also always had difficulty understanding anything other than cash in and cash out.)
However, the question remains as always whether the EC's money has gone out to people who were properly entitled to it - whether the payments are 'legal and regular'. It is here that the issue remains contentious and here that the Court has only inched slightly forward in its recognition that the EC is making a little bit of progress - but the Court still thinks there is a 'material' amount of ineligible payments.
But then you have to understand 'ineligible' does not mean 'fraud' - and you have to understand that 'material' does not mean more than a few % anyway. Effectively the Court is saying that more than 90% of the money does go to people who are entitled to it - and those who are not entiteld to it may not be entitled to it only for relatively technical errors in their claims.
And then you hvae to understnad that the whole concept of the CAP and the Structural Funds were set up by the member states in order that they would be implemented by the member states directly with their own publics. And the commission is left running round trying to tell the member states how they ought to be managing the payments.
And finally the EC is tired of being the punchbag and is trying to make sweeping claims back from member states who show 'system weaknesses' (which may or may not reflect real irregularities underneath).
All very technical and boring I know - but I have still not seen a journalist get the right balance on all this.
Complain about this comment
at #11,
ha ha..
and who's elegible/entitled according to EU?
those who have crazy ideas, and produce nothing.. this is called awarding incompetency.. after all, whole EU-elite has become a parasite of the system.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
karolina001
Nice riposte but I think you are responding to a spokesperson employed by the EU who has a vested interest in trying to justify the EU ways of working.
Anyone who disagrees with the EU ways of working is a thickhead and that now includes Journalists who cannot get the right balance i.e. the EU can be as incompetent as it likes but it is everyone else who does not understand apparently.
That is what is really funny! ;)
Complain about this comment
#5 - Menedemus
"I see the ECA is advertising for the post of Secretary-General for the ECA as this Report is published."
I noticed it was advertised as 'temporary'. Do they know something we don't?
Complain about this comment
#15, threnodio,
It probably depends on whether he does his job or not, if he sees too much and talks then he/she will go, if the next set of accounts are signed off then the job becomes permanent. I still can't forget what happened to a whistle blower in the anti (sorry pro) corruption department, she got fired by the commissar in charge who most of us will know was from Wales.
I think the job description should specify as a prime requirement, excellent experience in turning a blind eye, doing nothing, saying little and having the financial acumen to manage large sums (salary and um guess).
Complain about this comment
The guilty ones are not the EC. Its the mafia in Southern Italy, and similar organisations all over the place
Complain about this comment
I am sure that there is a lot of money going missing from the EU budget and I am also sure that money from the EU budget is being misused. I would also agree with those people who say that the EU representitives of the EU countries have their snouts deeply stuck into the trough.
Can any citizen of any EU country say that their own politicians and civil servants are squeeky clean. I don't think so. All politicians and workers of all governments have their fingers in the pie. Sadly, this is a way of life. Whoever said that life was fair?
Now, accepting the premise that power corrupts, you would have to look passed this abuse at the EU and see what else they are doing that is of benefit to us.
1. Peace in the EU
2. Fantastic Health and Safety laws. (I remember when the UK had no Health and Safety laws. It came out in 1974)
3. Open borders. We have the right to travel anywhere in the EU and settle.
4. Free trade
5. Respect for the smaller countries in the EU on the world stage, through the auspices of the EU.
I'm sure that I can continue with this list and that other posters will come up with even better ones.
The EU is not perfect and probably never will be, but it is far better than having no EU at all.
Complain about this comment
Are the EU programmes designed to be an efficient and effective use of money? Now that is a very different question.
But remember
a) the nature and size of the programmes is decided by the Member States not the EC (remember Blair and chirac fighting over the budget). They are just implemented and coordinated by the EC and
b) is it any more inefficient and ineffective than the use of money by National Governments? I doubt it - think of the dome, think of the huge waste in aborted IT programmes etc. Although the fact that there is less accountability at European level (and the difficult of making and changing decisions at that level) probably does risk that ineffeciency and ineffectiveness is allowed to continue longer at that level.
Are there frauds by people claiming on the EU programmes? - for sure. But is it more than e.g. the frauds in social security claimants on National Governments?- I very much doubt it pro rata - and if the national Audit office made an announcement about that every year then we would have the same story there every year.
It might be true that the nature of EU programmes is to give relatively large grants (probably larger than classical national programmes) and so it is possible that a few individual people and organisations do get away with some larger sums of money. But dont forget that the reason the stories are in the paper is because they are caught - which is at least evidence of some controls (and the Court provides an indication of the total remaining of all kinds of errors, not just of frauds)
I am not saying there is nothing wrong with the managmeent of EU money - and I do agree with the point about lack of protectin of whistleblowers - I am only saying it should be put in some proportion.
Complain about this comment
I've read many Italian cases of fraud among those 100 stressed by the critics.
I don't know if in Britain, or in the rest of Europe, people really understand which is the actual state of (un)justice in Italy. I think it's hard to believe that the organized crime has as much power as it really has if you don't leave in Italy. Unfortunately most of the information about this matter is available only in Italian, and unfortunately is very difficult to believe to people which are not used to the Italian situation.
Stealing European founds is one of the main activities of the corrupted Italian local and national administration which too often is deeply linked with the organized crime.
There is a very good book about the history and development of organized crime in Italy during the last 200 years titled "Il ritorno del Principe" unfortunately it's just in Italian.
So if Britons and other European people want to save their money and their country from the Italian cancer which is eating our country you have just two choices:
1. destroying the EU completely and eliminating also any form of cross border free trade (yes a free trade area will be as evil as the present EU on this point),
2. creating some kind of FBI on the European level able to destroy the organized crime active in Italy (and perhaps in the east, but I don't know to much those situations) before it will expand in the rest of Europe, and if do not destroy it today, it will diffuse in the same way it diffused from the south of Italy to the north when we were so arrogant to think it would never had happened to us.
Complain about this comment
I note that the only example given against Cornwall is the small scheme in which lasers are used to replace guns so simulated pigeon-shooting can be tried! Not bad, given the benefits that have come from Cornwall's Objective One money.
Complain about this comment
gedguy2 @18 wrote:
"Now, accepting the premise that power corrupts, you would have to look passed this abuse at the EU and see what else they are doing that is of benefit to us.
1. Peace in the EU
2. Fantastic Health and Safety laws. (I remember when the UK had no Health and Safety laws. It came out in 1974)
3. Open borders. We have the right to travel anywhere in the EU and settle.
4. Free trade
5. Respect for the smaller countries in the EU on the world stage, through the auspices of the EU."
Without wishing to enter 'What did the Romans ever do for us?' territory: a quick reply.
1. Thanks to NATO.
2. H and S laws are not an untarnished success. (Too many examples to state). And besides, the UK didn't need the EU to make this legislation - just political will and popular support.
3. British people have always traveled around Europe and settled in many European countries. And vice versa re the continentals to Britain. This is all very well documented. We didn't need a super-state for that.
4. Again, We don't need a super-state for that. Especially as much of British trade was and is with countries outside the EU.
5. And, once again: We don't need a super-state to engender respect for 'smaller countries'. Switzerland, for example, has always been respected everywhere. Other countries less so.
Complain about this comment
Mark I don't know why my post #13 was not published, it didn't broke any rule..
the main point there was and I rewrite it again that Frattini the Italian ECommisioner is having his own shares in newly countries such as Bulgaria, Rumania, and the rest of balkan region. His name is mentioned also in Open Europe 100 frauds in Bulgaria..
Like him there are others.. and we know how it works,.. there is discrimination on who gets the funds, and how you get them, and what you should do with them..
many time they(EU people) support and incourage misspending, to cover their frauds.
Complain about this comment
If you let me write, i can write you a more or less full list of EU (mafia guys) politicans, and the schemes they use and how they make the money laundering in the newly EU countries and futute and potential candidate, not to mentioned other funds going for Africa etc, that are gone missing before riching the destination.
The list of names and the schemes.
Complain about this comment
# 10 The UK must get out of this failed eu quango.
The UK is already half outside of this “quango”, as a result of the fact that it is the *only* EU member country that is out of all the major EU pillars, e.g. the Eurozone, Schengen, the Charter of Rights.
The UK and you just need to grow up and decide where you want to be. You want to be out of the EU in a mythical ‘open Europe’? What is stopping you?
That quango Open Europe also needs to grow up. They should realise that an open Europe already exists, but outside the UK. It is called Schengen. It is a Europe where people can move between countries without having to show their passports to a member of the police state, but the quango Open Europe, doesn’t want to be part of that open Europe, it wants to maintain the UK police state in their mythical Open Europe. Very grown up, indeed.
Some bedtime reading for Open Europe and poster 10:
Foreigners be warned – paranoia rules at the British border
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a395ccd4-9fb1-11dc-8031-0000779fd2ac.html
Control freaks
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/28b3322c-9700-11dc-b2da-0000779fd2ac.html
Complain about this comment
to all pro-EU politiburos here in this blog:
you cannot make people shut up by telling them that your governments are corrupt as well so that we stop exposing EU for what it is. read my post #2 to understand why EU allows and then closes an eye to rampant corruption.
those cases that are reported are not because of EU control, but because of us the people who want justice and transparency.
Do the EU elites have immunity against prosecution? i havnt seen one going to jail exept being promoted even further. see the swedish example in OpenEurope report.
why we need one more corrupt structure except our governments? our governments are corrupt but elected, therefore accountable to the people.
while remember, EU is corrupt and unelected too.
Complain about this comment
#25, JorgeG1,
It's not so much that the UK needs to grow up as that for the last ten years it has been governed by a bunch of Socialist control freaks who would make the KGB proud. Don't blame the average British person for this other than they were fooled by the smooth talking Tony Blair. Your referenced articles give you some clue as the the extent of the surveillance society that has been created and it's not a very nice reading but nonetheless true as I have also been delayed and controlled often when returning to the UK.
On another of my frustrations you mentioned the major EU pillars, e.g. the Eurozone, Schengen, the Charter of Rights.
There are so many holes in these that apart from the ability to cross a border and spend the same currency there is little without problems. The promised Social Europe is a mess if you exercise the right to live and work in multiple countries, with protectionism and nationalism everywhere. Even pension rights are difficult and expensive to establish and protect, as a friend of mine is discovering now. The UK seems to be ahead of the EU in establishing a protectionist Socialist Island but I hope that the EU will eventually show the way by becoming less protective Socialist and more Social in it's laws, but first Germany and France need to change their protectionist direction.
Complain about this comment
Shock, Horror, The Shame Of It.
The EU waste money.
Well I would never have guessed.
The EU is a waste of Time Energy and Money.
A holiday park for power mad politicians.
Their theme tune should be If I Ruled The World.
Mental hospitals have their fair share of this delusional malady.
Power corrupts, as we have seen.
Complain about this comment
They have signed off on the accounts. They are not perfect but they are a big improvement. Some progress is being made.
But, here we go again . . .
The 'get us out of here', 'it's a massive fraud', 'we don't need the EU' brigade are out in force again.
If your car breaks down, do you abandon it and spend the rest of life walking or do you fix it? If a piece of software fails, do you reinstall or go back to using pen and paper? Whatever happened to the attitude that we have a problem and should be sorting it out approach? I will tell you what has happened. A bunch of eurosceptics are hijacking an administrative issue and perverting it for entirely political ends.
I do not have a problem with people having an alternative opinion. I will be happy to debate the issues with you but please stop trying to build a case on the back of a single set of figures. It does not wash.
Complain about this comment
How can you fix a car with old tools, and old replacing parts...? How can you fix EU with same old politicans, using same old methods?
Is it better to buy a brand-new part and put it inside an old car..? It will not last longer than the one it is supposed to replace.
Why not buy a new car, and sell the old car to the ones who never had a car in first place?
EU is a joke, Europe is not.
EU is de juro, Europe is de facto.
EU is fictional, Europe is a reality.
EU is for the elites, Europe is for everyone.
There can be no EU without Europe, but there can be Europe without EU.
Complain about this comment
30 - karolina001
"How can you fix EU with same old politicans, using same old methods?"
Forgive me, I am plainly missing something. I thought that was what elections were for.
Complain about this comment
28. machinehappydays:
Oh my goodness, what an erudite analysis. Suddenly all is clear!
Complain about this comment
EU is UNELECTED.
Complain about this comment
don't try to prove indirect links of thier shadow self election
Complain about this comment
28. machinehappydays: *Well I would never have guessed.*
I like this sentence, by the way, me too i would have never guessed EU is a joke :))
Complain about this comment
Threnodio (29): An incoming British government should make an attempt to really reform the EU, for example through change such that one national government is not bound by the political decisions agreed to by its predecessors at EU level. However we cannot stay in the EU at all costs. It is in the interests of the Conservative party to negotiate real reform or they will not be able to undo anything that Labour is able to lock them into via the EU.
The Federalists are not going to like such reform, but unless the EU27 accept it then democracy will inevitably die in Europe. If we cannot gain agreement from our partners in a timely manner (say 2 years) then the UK simply has to walk away.
Complain about this comment
#36 - Freeborn-John
As usual, you bring some good sense into the madhouse.
The very last thing I want is for the EU to continue blindly down a course which disregards the will of the people either of individual nation states or the great mass of the population as a whole.
I accept that root and branch reform is necessary in a whole host of areas - democratic accountability, the CAP, an approach to foreign and defence policy which accommodates the needs of countries with external interests and, yes, the accounting procedures. As a Brit, I would be deeply saddened if the EU27 was so inflexible that ultimately they had to walk away. It saddens me even more that, while we are talking about the democratic deficit in Europe, the British are surrendering or having stolen from them many of it's democratic rights by it's own government and I would like to see the Tories addressing that as well.
However, as an expat now living in mainland Europe, I can that, if the UK were to walk away, they would be leaving behind a substantial body of people who very much share the British view of what Europe should be and would therefore be deeply sorry if this came to pass but would nevertheless shrug and say 'so be it'. There is a better solution and that is to scrap Lisbon and embark on a process of root and branch reform. This case will be very hard to sell without Britain in the ring.
#34 - karolina001
Do stop ranting! The European Parliament is elected by universal sufferage and well you know it. The point is to give it some teeth freshly extracted from the Commission.
Complain about this comment
# 37 Threnedio
When I read your post, and the one relating to it, I shuddered at the thought of us breaking away from the EU, and then I remembered my own views about Scotland breaking away from the union that it is in with the UK and thought to myself that I was being hypocritical. 'Why should I object to GB pulling out of the EU when I want Scotland to pull out of GB because it is not working to the benefit of the Scots?'
I had to sit and think about that for a moment. I have reached the conclusion that I need to spend more time thinking about this. At first my answer was that Scotland would immediately join the EU (as England + would) and as such would be a full partner with England within the EU, but that doesn't detract one iota from the fact that Scotland withdrew from a Union. So why shouldn't GB withdraw from a Union?
I wish this subject had not been brought up as I, obviously, haven't thought this one through. Thanks ;-)
Complain about this comment
Mark Mardell: You are not going to get EU dissidents excited by stories of corruption. We are beyond caring about that.
threnodio (37): I used to believe in the possibility of real EU reform. The June 2007 EU Council was the moment when the EU Constitutional project should have been abandoned and real reform commenced. The response from the politicians was instead to disguise the EU Constitution and rubber-stamp it in parliaments where they command a majority. For me it was the crossing of the Rubicon. I cannot see that they will reverse course now when they would not in the wake of the French and Dutch referendum results. We will see next month.
The UK should negotiate for real reform (and perhaps has to prior to leaving the EU anyway). I believe that rather than negotiating on specific topics, e.g. opting-out of the social chapter for example, we should negotiate on the wider constitutional issue of one government currently being bound by the agreements that previous governments have entered into at EU level. This is what the social chapter is an example of anyway, and the wider issue is one that people in other countries can warm too. This would test those Continental politicians who SAY that the concept of federal Europe has been abandoned BUT push so hard for treaty changes that bring it about anyway. If they refuse such a proposal then it becomes clear that they really are for a federal Europe in which national legislatures will slowly be shut-down by the ever-rising volume of superior EU law. If it becomes clear that federal Europe is the only thing on offer then I believe it would be good enough reason for most Britons to vote to leave. If the attitude of other nations is 'so be it' then at least they would be clear too as to where they were heading.
Complain about this comment
#38 - gedguy2
I would not worry too much. After all, I have been banging on about a federal solution for the UK while retaining nation states status within the EU. Your plans are not incompatible anyway. As you say, there is no reason why Scotland should not join the EU in it's own right if it were to leave the UK.
One of the big problems with either solution is defence and specifically the nuclear deterrent. The idea of someone deep in an Austrian alp accidentally pressing the red button just as the Scottish Navy is towing the English navy out of Holy Loch doesn't bear thinking about, does it:-)
Complain about this comment
#39 - Freeborn-John
"I believe it would be good enough reason for most Britons to vote to leave".
What makes you think any party with a hope of power in Britain cares enough about what the people think to give them a vote?
Complain about this comment
wait a minute.. we are talking about re-negotiation for UK, but we dont mention with who we should negotiate? who is behind EU? or better say, who is representing EU? Is UK going to negotiate with Germany, or France? if Poland want to negotiate is it that it has to negotiate with Italy or Spain? If other countries want to negotiate, what happens, with who?
and the Question is: Who is EU?
Answer: a joke.
Complain about this comment
# 40 Threnodio
I think that Rear Admiral Jock MacTavish in his Scottish Navy rowing boat will not get too far towing the nuclear subs.
Alex Salmond has made it perfectly clear that the subs will have to go. However, I cannot see him telling them to get out the day after independence. I'm sure that it will take some time for the English + to find suitable accommodation for their subs. These things are not going to happen overnight. The same will apply to all the other military. Knowing the Scots, a fair few will probably stay in the English + military as I suspect that we will not need anywhere near the amount that we have now. I see no problem with that.
Complain about this comment
The European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg has just announced (4th November) its decision on the appeal by British State Pensioners who are trying to have their pensions unfrozen. 50% of British pensioners living abroad in certain countries have their pensions frozen. The other 50% living in another set of foreign countries, including, but not exclusively, all the countries of the European Union.
The pensioners lost their appeal.
Has anyone noticed?
I was told some time ago by Giles Chichester who was an MEP at the time, that this is not a problem to be discussed by the European parliament. Is it a problem you can discuss in your blog, perhaps? It might be of interest to readers thinking of emigrating.
Complain about this comment
#44, DELVIND,
Yes I'd heard about the case and know a bit of the background as it is a disgrace that overseas (non-EU) pensions are not indexed since the people concerned have contributed to those pension throughout the time they were in the UK. However I think we should be thankful that the 50% have not also had their pensions capped as if 'pension thief' Brown could have got away with that he most certainly would have, maybe there is some EU directive that stopped him. Anyone any ideas which one it was that actually got implemented?
Complain about this comment
DELVIND @ #44
I did not even know that this was, in fact, an issue that existed.
The Press Release of the ECHR Judgement is very informative.
Unfortunately I cannot post the link even as plain text for some reason but the website search facility does bring up the Case of Carson and others versus the UK Government. The Press Release is the easiest document to read to understand.
However, the ECHR is correct, they cannot intervene in what is fundamentally a political decision where the human rights are not actually contravened. The issue of freezing ex-patriots State pensions despite them having contributed exactly the same as their counterparts who just happen to remain in the UK is entirely immoral but it is for the UK Parliament to address and correct this immoral practice.
Complain about this comment
#46 - Menedemus
This is news to me and I find it absolutely astonishing. What about the things we expats have paid for that we do not now want back. We have assumed responsibility for our health care, we are not cluttering up the roads, not being a burden on social services, not relying on social housing, not drawing the winter fuel allowance and a host of other things. All we want are the pensions we paid for. Fortunately I am within the EU but wherever we are, the government should be honest and admit that they are glad to see the back of us.
Complain about this comment
#25 JorgeG1
'You want to be out of the EU in a mythical 'open Europe?'. What is stopping you.'
Firstly we did not agree to join (no referendum) and there is no mechanism for us to get out. (no referendum).
If you think this all about freedom of movement and passports then I pity you and your narrow outlook on life. This is about the self determination of people and it is about democracy.
The border between Ireland South and North is virtually non existent. Either side of this border they have different currencies, different political systems, different taxes, yet the border is open. If Scotland were to go independent, the same would probably happen.
If you have been sold the lie that you we all need to be identikit eu citizens in order to have freedom of movement then, as I say, I feel sorry for you.
Those of us who love Europe, love its diversity and love the fact that we can elect our own governments and those governments make laws with the consent of their own people cannot see how a discredited, corrupt and unelected quango can do anything good for us.
Complain about this comment
@ 48 KennethM
*Those of us who love Europe, love its diversity and love the fact that we can elect our own governments and those governments make laws with the consent of their own people cannot see how a discredited, corrupt and unelected quango can do anything good for us.*
Are you talking about the British government? Its PM was unelected, the government is discredited and many say it is corrupt as well…. they have been caught red handed offering peerages in exchange for party donations, so I think that counts as corruption well enough. And the opposition is also rapidly catching up, going cap in hand to the yachts of Russian oligarchs for donations.
*Firstly we did not agree to join (no referendum) and there is no mechanism for us to get out. (no referendum).*
You just don’t get it do you? What was the referendum in 1975 about? What was voted for in 1975 has EVOLVED into the current quango, as you call it. So, basically the British people voted to become part of the quango that existed in 1975 which has evolved into the current one. In the interim period, successive British governments have voted to the successive treaties to make that quango evolve. Ok, I agree that they are not offering you and IN or OUT referendum, and I am also the first one to say that they definitely should. But why blame the EU for that? It is the unelected and undemocratic British government (always run by a public school elite, no matter what the political sign) who is not allowing the British people a say in whether they like the evolved quango that they voted for originally in 1975.
*If you think this all about freedom of movement and passports then I pity you and your narrow outlook on life.*
I pity you for being so incapable of understanding plain English (as I suppose that it is your native language). I was only offering an example of one of the many pillars of EU integration that the UK is not part of. Nothing more, nothing else.
*This is about the self determination of people and it is about democracy.*
Absolutely, it is about the UK people and its government making a decision of self determination. So far, the UK gov. hasn’t allowed the people a say on the *quango*, at least not since 1975, but they are still supposedly the representatives of the British people, even if the current PM wasn’t directly elected (as PM) by anybody, as far as I know. So it is time you and the rest of the Anti-EU brigade join forces so that you outnumber the pro-EUs or DKs and can pull the country out of the EU. As far as I know the EU is not forcing the UK to stay, but I am sure you will correct me on that.
Complain about this comment
Hindsight is a wonderful thing, I wonder how Lord Mandelson is feeling now.
Jim
www.bulgariasfinest.com
Complain about this comment
#49 JorgeG1
You will need to appraise yourself about the UK political system. The Prime Minister is not elected as the UK has a cabinet system. If the Prime Minister was directly elected I daresay he would effectively become president and the UK would (effectively) become a republic. Any major constitutional change such as this would almost certainly require a referendum.
What was voted for by the UK in 1975 was the EEC. It had no executive powers over the UK, apart from in some very narrow areas. I agree that it has evolved. The evolution into a body with wide ranging executive powers would surely require a referendum (I think we agree on that).
I believe that we crossed the line a long time ago. However, majority voting is the line in the sand that we must stop at. Losing the veto means losing the right to determine our own laws. That is not acceptable to us (and I doubt that it is acceptable to most nations).
As far as corruption is concerned it is frankly insulting to compare the UK government with a group that has not been able to get its accounts approved by auditors for countless years. In any case, two wrongs don’t make a right and what is more, surely corruption in democratically elected government using public funds is bad but corruption in a quango using public funds is far far worse.
I also agree that the UK government is at fault and it is not the eu that is forcing us to stay as a member. However we are where we are. The eu is a discredited quango and the UK should have nothing to do with it. This is why it is important for us to continue lobbying MPs (who are the ones who are elected) for a referendum.
Complain about this comment
I hear the EEC is now struggling for money, I wonder how much money they will need
Paul
[Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]
Complain about this comment
Mark:
Whose fault is it that £200m-worth of European Union money (yes, your money) has been misspent in Britain?
I think it would be the fault of the British government for misspending the money and also, for the People in Brussels for not monitoring the money....
~Dennis Junior~
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
*wonders why there is no option to mark posts as Spamm on this board such as #30, #33, #34*
So if the EU costs money that is a bad thing...if the EU gives the money back and your stupid politicians feel like wasting it it also the fault of the EU... let me think if the EU hadn't taken the money in the first place or if Britain would really leave the EU this money would be in the hands of the same local politicians again who could waste it again...
If the percentage of EU-phobes british people on this board was representative it maybe would be better if you would really leave it, but since there are relatively few producing companies left in Britain you should maybe think about all the import taxes you would have to pay then. Financial services are also available from Zurich, New York, Tokio or even Frankfurt - I doubt that we need London for that!
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS