Ken Clarke Shows David Cameron Up On The EU Demand Of 1.7 Billion!..................

13

Comments

  • clinchclinch Posts: 11,574
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Styker wrote: »

    Its what the EU has done in backdating this from 1995 and on the "black economy" that seems to be dodgey. Not so much for focusing on the black economy for me as that is real money being spent imo but how far they are backdating it too. Why did they go back so far for and did they do that to all EU countries?

    And apparently applied it to countries now in the Union who were not in the Union in the years for which they have revised the figures.
  • BrokenArrowBrokenArrow Posts: 21,665
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    MartinP wrote: »
    Has this been officially confirmed?

    No it hasn't and its false, the methodology change has been known, its affect on bills was not.
  • Richard1960Richard1960 Posts: 20,340
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    MartinP wrote: »
    Has this been officially confirmed?

    Bills like this do not just turn up out of the Blue,we employ a lot of " Sir Humphrey Appleby's " as in yes minister if somebody did not know then they damm well should have done.

    my money would be on they knew and and have faked surprise to sound tough . ;-)
  • Richard1960Richard1960 Posts: 20,340
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭

    Since I didn't write that quote you attributed to me, I don't feel misinformed :confused:

    deleted
  • StykerStyker Posts: 49,778
    Forum Member
    MartinP wrote: »
    Has this been officially confirmed?

    Its a bit all over the place. Labour and broadcast news channels were saying yesterday that Osborne knew early in the year, Labour said Nicky Morgan warned about it a few months ago while she was the Economics Secretary at the treasury and some MP's said that Treasury officialls admitted that they knew too but it didn't get far enough up the chain of command.

    If that last part was true, maybe this was a Yes Minister thing where important documents were put in right towrds the bottom of a Minister's 3rd box out of 5?
  • ohglobbitsohglobbits Posts: 4,480
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I think we can expect more from Clarke as Cameron cuts to the chase (prbably earlier than he would have liked) and stops pretending that he will 'negociate' with the EU
  • Nick1966Nick1966 Posts: 15,742
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    ohglobbits wrote: »
    I think we can expect more from Clarke as Cameron cuts to the chase (prbably earlier than he would have liked) and stops pretending that he will 'negociate' with the EU

    According to the Guardian (pinch of salt), the Dutch will pay their extra money which the EU is demanding.

    Perhaps tellingly...

    "One senior Tory said that George Osborne might find the process uncomfortable because the chancellor failed to mention the demand from the European Commission to the prime minister. One source said that the chancellor had hoped to embark on private negotiations to bring down the bill by factoring in rebates Britain is expecting on competion fines. This strategy was destroyed by the leak of the European Commission demand to the FT, hours after the opening of the summit on Thursday."

    Seems reasonable. A combination of:

    Miscommunication
    Hoping this problem could be discussed privately
    the FT got hold of the story.
  • Urban BassmanUrban Bassman Posts: 2,230
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    On the Daily Politics yesterday, the EU official had a copy of the letter Nicky Morgan sent in March raising this issue with the Government and he also said that the Dutch had confirmed they would pay by the December deadline.

    He also said that failure to pay would result in the UK being fined and that the rebate would "be back on the table" - a not very veiled threat,

    This is dangerous territory because it could potentially affect our international credit rating. That would have major implications for trade and our economy.

    I think it's wrong that we have had the demand, but it's not all as black and white as it seems. The implications need to be thoroughly considered.

    Also, if it was known about as long ago as January and it was flagged up by Nicky Morgan in March and nothing was done, then heads need to role.
  • MTUK1MTUK1 Posts: 20,077
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    On the Daily Politics yesterday, the EU official had a copy of the letter Nicky Morgan sent in March raising this issue with the Government and he also said that the Dutch had confirmed they would pay by the December deadline.

    He also said that failure to pay would result in the UK being fined and that the rebate would "be back on the table" - a not very veiled threat,

    This is dangerous territory because it could potentially affect our international credit rating. That would have major implications for trade and our economy.

    I think it's wrong that we have had the demand, but it's not all as black and white as it seems. The implications need to be thoroughly considered.

    Also, if it was known about as long ago as January and it was flagged up by Nicky Morgan in March and nothing was done, then heads need to role.

    Who says it could damage our credit rating?
  • LostFoolLostFool Posts: 90,645
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    ohglobbits wrote: »
    I think we can expect more from Clarke as Cameron cuts to the chase (prbably earlier than he would have liked) and stops pretending that he will 'negociate' with the EU

    Maybe Labour should make Ken Leader of the Opposition as he's doing a better job of holding the government to account than Miliband is.
  • BrokenArrowBrokenArrow Posts: 21,665
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    The Dutch are good Europeans.
  • Richard1960Richard1960 Posts: 20,340
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    LostFool wrote: »
    Maybe Labour should make Ken Leader of the Opposition as he's doing a better job of holding the government to account than Miliband is.


    He absolutely is i like Ken Clarke one of the old school of independent minded MPs and practically if not impossible to spin.
  • MTUK1MTUK1 Posts: 20,077
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭

    He absolutely is i like Ken Clarke one of the old school of independent minded MPs and practically if not impossible to spin.

    He's also happy to sell us down the river on Europe.
  • Richard1960Richard1960 Posts: 20,340
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    MTUK1 wrote: »
    He's also happy to sell us down the river on Europe.

    On no i agree on that but at least he tells you straight not saying one thing then doing another.

    Also Sir Bill Cash was on the radio yesterday calling the whole system "nuts" he led the revolt against the Maastricht treaty.
  • Urban BassmanUrban Bassman Posts: 2,230
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    MTUK1 wrote: »
    Who says it could damage our credit rating?

    I did say "could potentially".

    It's the same arguement that was used in the currency debate during the Scottish referendum when the SNP said they would not accept their part of the UK debt if there was not a currency union.

    The UK would could possibly be seen as "non payers" and that could possibly see a down grade in our Credit Rating.
  • MTUK1MTUK1 Posts: 20,077
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I did say "could potentially".

    It's the same arguement that was used in the currency debate during the Scottish referendum when the SNP said they would not accept their part of the UK debt if there was not a currency union.

    The UK would could possibly be seen as "non payers" and that could possibly see a down grade in our Credit Rating.

    I disagree. It's not a debt.
  • AndyCopenAndyCopen Posts: 2,213
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    The Dutch are good Europeans.

    I suppose if bending over and taking it from the Germans makes you a good European
  • StykerStyker Posts: 49,778
    Forum Member
    The anti EU lot including "Main Man Farage" need to realise that leaving the EU will almost certainly cost us loads more in tariffs, lost jobs and benefits having to be paid to those who lose their jobs because companies leave the UK because we are no longer in the EU.

    Yes we can TRY and get our own free trade deals but there is no guarantee we will get them and even if we do they will take ages to get agreement on and there is also a high chance that a lot of the things we will have to agree to won't be all favourable to us either! On that basis, its probably better to stay in the EU and call for change from within rather than out.

    Oh and countries like Switzerland and Norway have to pay billions to trade with the EU too and agree to their rules so what independence will we have if we leave the EU but still want to trade with them? Not much I think!
  • jmclaughjmclaugh Posts: 63,996
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Styker wrote: »
    The anti EU lot including "Main Man Farage" need to realise that leaving the EU will almost certainly cost us loads more in tariffs, lost jobs and benefits having to be paid to those who lose their jobs because companies leave the UK because we are no longer in the EU.

    Yes we can TRY and get our own free trade deals but there is no guarantee we will get them and even if we do they will take ages to get agreement on and there is also a high chance that a lot of the things we will have to agree to won't be all favourable to us either! On that basis, its probably better to stay in the EU and call for change from within rather than out.

    Oh and countries like Switzerland and Norway have to pay billions to trade with the EU too and agree to their rules so what independence will we have if we leave the EU but still want to trade with them? Not much I think!

    We run a trade deficit of over £40b p.a. with the EU so if the EU don't wish to have a free trade agreement with a UK outside of the EU and cut off their nose to spite their face that is up to them.

    Getting the EU to change is like expecting the sun not to come up.
  • StykerStyker Posts: 49,778
    Forum Member
    jmclaugh wrote: »
    We run a trade deficit of over £40b p.a. with the EU so if the EU don't wish to have a free trade agreement with a UK outside of the EU and cut off their nose to spite their face that is up to them.

    Getting the EU to change is like expecting the sun not to come up.

    40 Billion spread out over 27 countries not just 1 country called The EU. We wil trade with then if we leave but it will either cost us at the same amount as it does now and we will still have to agree to their rules or it will cost us more and still have to agree to their rules so its better to stay in the EU, pay less and try and change it from within!

    Even individual states of the USA keep on complaining that "Washington doesn't get the individual states". Former Governors of states running for President have also said that as well but the USA is the richest and most powerful country in the world. What this points out is that its hard to get things all your own way but if on the grand scheme of things its not all too bad, then maybe people should be happy with their lot and stop moaning so much.
  • Nick1966Nick1966 Posts: 15,742
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    jmclaugh wrote: »
    We run a trade deficit of over £40b p.a. with the EU so if the EU don't wish to have a free trade agreement with a UK outside of the EU and cut off their nose to spite their face that is up to them. .

    Don't overstate the case.

    Approximately 50% of UK's trade is with the rest of the EU.
    Approximately 15% of the rest of the EU's trade is with the UK.
  • Nick1966Nick1966 Posts: 15,742
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Styker wrote: »
    Oh and countries like Switzerland and Norway have to pay billions to trade with the EU too and agree to their rules so what independence will we have if we leave the EU but still want to trade with them?

    Not only that, 2013, Norway paid €290 million directly to the EU.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norway%E2%80%93European_Union_relations#History
  • solenoidsolenoid Posts: 15,495
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Our government signed up to the new accountancy rules over a year ago. Whether they actually understood the repurcussions for the UK is debateable. Treasury number crunchers should have been more alert.
  • smudges dadsmudges dad Posts: 36,989
    Forum Member
    solenoid wrote: »
    Our government signed up to the new accountancy rules over a year ago. Whether they actually understood the repurcussions for the UK is debateable. Treasury number crunchers should have been more alert.

    I suppose it shows that the treasury being led by someone with expertise in folding towels is not an outstanding success.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,889
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    ANYBODY who entertains the idea that the current administration DIDN'T know is more moronic than the pathetic way he is trying to make himself look like he's on our side.

    ABSOLUTE NONSENSE
Sign In or Register to comment.