Friday, June 10, 2005
Rebate Wars
There is a "crisis" in Europe after the referendum defeats for the Dutch and French government. The usually pro-EU citizens have decided that something isn't right and that their politicians aren't delivering what they had hoped. In France, this is clearly related to their poor economic condition. Growth is flat and unemployment is at about 10%. This is not what they had been lead to believe would happen if they joined the single currency. The Dutch vote is different. There it seems to be linked more to concerns about immigration and an expanded EU. Whatever the reasons though, the common statement is clear: we're not happy with the way the EU is heading.
In the light of this, the obvious reaction for European politicians would be to take a step back and start to ask: what do our people really want? Where are we going wrong? This however isn't what is happening. The constitutional treaty's rejection is because it is biased in favour of an Anglo-Saxon economic system, it is claimed. This is, of course, the UK's fault. In addition to this, loud questions are being asked about the rebate from contributions to the EU, despite the fact we take out less than we put in and, over the last 20 years have contributed about twice as much as France (once the Common Agricultural Policy and other subsidies are taken into account).
The UK is being painted as the cause of all the EU's ills. We wish to turn the EU into a free market, where competition rules and social protections are reduced. And to be honest, they're right as far as I'm concerned. It is clear that the French and German economies, with their deep-seated protections of labour leading to inflexible job markets, are not working. The unemployment figures speak for themselves. Our economic system, similar to that of the USA though slightly less brutally competitive and with more social protections, seems to be superior having ridden out the post-dot.com boom slump with less of a problem than the eurozone. Turning the EU into a freer market would not be such a bad thing - and it was afterall what we agreed to all those years ago (and before my time) when we initially joined.
Then there is the rebate issue. Clearly the financing of the EU needs to be re-jigged. There is wide disparity between the per capita inputs of some of the richer countries. The problem, however, is not the UK's rebate (as has been pointed out above, it is still justified), it is the way the money raised is spent that is in most need of reform. The Common Agricultural Policy is a disgrace to the modern world, adding as it does to problems faced by developing nations by reducing the competitiveness of those countries' products. Removing, or at least significantly reducing, the CAP would not only cut a large chunk off the costs of the EU but it would also make a massive difference to competitiveness of farmers in many developing countries.
So how about a deal then fellow citizens of the EU: we give up our rebate if you agree to dump the CAP?
Link of the day: Who needs guns when you can just use your body?
(Yes I know it's poor but I've not had time to find anything more interesting!)
In the light of this, the obvious reaction for European politicians would be to take a step back and start to ask: what do our people really want? Where are we going wrong? This however isn't what is happening. The constitutional treaty's rejection is because it is biased in favour of an Anglo-Saxon economic system, it is claimed. This is, of course, the UK's fault. In addition to this, loud questions are being asked about the rebate from contributions to the EU, despite the fact we take out less than we put in and, over the last 20 years have contributed about twice as much as France (once the Common Agricultural Policy and other subsidies are taken into account).
The UK is being painted as the cause of all the EU's ills. We wish to turn the EU into a free market, where competition rules and social protections are reduced. And to be honest, they're right as far as I'm concerned. It is clear that the French and German economies, with their deep-seated protections of labour leading to inflexible job markets, are not working. The unemployment figures speak for themselves. Our economic system, similar to that of the USA though slightly less brutally competitive and with more social protections, seems to be superior having ridden out the post-dot.com boom slump with less of a problem than the eurozone. Turning the EU into a freer market would not be such a bad thing - and it was afterall what we agreed to all those years ago (and before my time) when we initially joined.
Then there is the rebate issue. Clearly the financing of the EU needs to be re-jigged. There is wide disparity between the per capita inputs of some of the richer countries. The problem, however, is not the UK's rebate (as has been pointed out above, it is still justified), it is the way the money raised is spent that is in most need of reform. The Common Agricultural Policy is a disgrace to the modern world, adding as it does to problems faced by developing nations by reducing the competitiveness of those countries' products. Removing, or at least significantly reducing, the CAP would not only cut a large chunk off the costs of the EU but it would also make a massive difference to competitiveness of farmers in many developing countries.
So how about a deal then fellow citizens of the EU: we give up our rebate if you agree to dump the CAP?
Link of the day: Who needs guns when you can just use your body?
(Yes I know it's poor but I've not had time to find anything more interesting!)
# posted by GrecianEd @ 12:01 am 
