Government spends £9.3m of YOUR money on EU Propaganda leaflets Watch

neal95
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#101
Report 2 years ago
#101
What tosh lmao
0
reply
paul514
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#102
Report 2 years ago
#102
(Original post by the bear)
1. Jobs

Around 3.5 million British jobs are directly linked to British membership of the European Union’s single market – 1 in 10 British jobs.

Reply - Explain how the figures were reached.
Was it that they simply added all the employees together of every company that trades anything with another company that is in an eu country regardless of its significance to that company?

2. Exports & investment

The EU buys over 50 per cent of UK exports (54 per cent of goods, 40 per cent of services).
Over 300,000 British companies and 74 per cent of British exporters operate in other EU markets.
American and Asian EU firms build factories in Britain because it is in the single market.

Reply - the eu doesn't buy that amount of our exports and it has been consistently going down over the last decade you need to check your facts. The U.K. Actually buys more from the eu than it sells to it also. Your assertion that American and Asian firms invest in the uk only because it is in the eu is laughable.

3. Trade

The EU negotiates trade agreements with the rest of the world. Outside the EU Britain would have to renegotiate trade deals alone. While the EU is the world’s largest market, a UK outside the EU would not be a high priority for other counties to negotiate a trade deal.

Reply - I suppose a country with the 5th largest economy in the world isn't a priority for every nation on earth to trade with isn't a priority then. I suppose that huge foreign office we have is useless and should be sold off for fancy London flats lol.

4. Consumer clout

British families enjoy lower mobile phone roaming charges, lower credit card fees, cheaper flights and proper compensation when flights are delayed or cancelled. These sorts of benefits could not be achieved by Britain alone.

Reply - oh really? Parliament can't legislate anything they like once we have left?

5. Clean environment

Through commonly agreed EU standards, national Governments have achieved improvements to the quality of air, rivers and beaches. Good for Britain and good for Britons holidaying or living abroad!

Reply - same as above

6. Power to curb the multinationals

The EU has taken on multinational giants like Microsoft, Samsung and Toshiba for unfair competition. The UK would not be able to do this alone.

Reply - again the same as above

7. Freedom to work and study abroad – and easy travel

1.4 million British people live abroad in the EU. More than 14,500 UK students took part in the European Union’s Erasmus student exchange scheme in 2012-13. Driving licences issued in the UK are valid throughout the EU.

Reply - the people who have gone to the eu are no longer our problem but regardless of this when looking at driving licences our licence is valid wherever we go on holiday i can hire and drive a car in the USA for example.
The general public couldn't care less what 14,000 people a year do when we look at a population of 60 million. Also don't forget there are more than double the amount of eu citizens in the uk than the uk have in Europe and the vast majority of uk citizens living in the eu are in Spain and Ireland. Ireland is a country that we have free movement with outside the European Union via a bi lateral agreement.

8. Peace and democracy

The EU has helped secure peace among previously warring western European nations. It helped to consolidate democracy in Spain, Portugal, Greece and former Soviet bloc countries and helped preserve peace in the Balkans since the end of the Balkans War. With the UN it now plays a leading role in conflict prevention, peacekeeping and democracy building.

Reply - wrong that's nato hence why Russia simply invaded a none nato country because it was getting closer to Europe membership

9. Equal pay and non-discrimination

Equal pay for men and women is enshrined in EU law, as are bans on discrimination by age, race or sexual orientation. This benefits Britain and British people who live in other EU countries.

Reply - those laws are already in British law

10. Influence in the world

As 28 democracies, and as the world’s biggest market, we are strong when we work together.
Britain is represented in many international organisations in joint EU delegations – giving Britain more influence than it would have alone. The EU has played a major role in climate, world trade and development.

Reply - that's why whilst in the eu we can't take our permanent seats at the wto and security council.


11. Cutting red tape

Common rules for the common market make it unnecessary to have 28 sets of national regulations.

Reply - haaaaa laughable rules imposed on us that aren't specifically for uk benefit. Oh yea and that vast majority of uk companies the ones that don't export to the eu have to abide by them even though they don't rebadge with them

12. Fighting crime

The European Arrest Warrant replaced long extradition procedures and enables the UK to extradite criminals wanted in other EU countries, and bring to justice criminals wanted in the UK who are hiding in other EU countries.

Eurojust helps UK authorities work with other EU countries’ to tackle international organised crime such as drug smuggling, people trafficking and money laundering.

Reply - I see so we couldn't be part of the European arrest warrant after leaving and share intelligence?


...and one bonus...

13. Research funding

The UK is the second largest beneficiary of EU research funds, and the British Government expects future EU research funding to constitute a vital source of income for our world-leading universities and companies

Reply - yep that money comes from the half of the membership fee we get back. We don't choose what research is done either and of course if we wish we can continue to find this after wards.

.
Replies are in the quoted post and I suggest rather than copy and pasting a crap pro eu website you actually look at the facts


Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
the bear
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#103
Report 2 years ago
#103
(Original post by paul514)
Replies are in the quoted post and I suggest rather than copy and pasting a crap pro eu website you actually look at the facts


Posted from TSR Mobile
The people imploring us to leave the EU complain that we pay so much into the EU budget, but get so little back. It is true that last year the UK was the 3rd largest contributor to the EU budget, contributing 12.57% (after rebate), but still behind France and Germany, the largest contributor. It’s also true that we receive considerably less back from the EU than we pay in – last year the difference was £8.5Bn. This might sound like a lot, but the UK’s total Gross Domestic Product last year was £2000 Bn, so our net contribution to the EU was equivalent to 0.4% of GDP.

the UK making a net contribution to the EU budget is equivalent to London being a net contributor to the UK budget, while Cornwall is a net recipient. The UK is one of the wealthiest countries in the EU. Since the EU is not just a single market, but also has a social purpose, it seems right and proper that we contribute to make things better in poorer parts of Europe.

Who benefits directly from financial payments from the EU to the UK?

Of the £4.6Bn received last year, £3bn went straight to landowners, via the Common Agricultural Policy. Most of this was in the form of a single payment, paid to landowners whether they grow food or not. About 15% of it went to Rural Development and most of this was spent on Agri-Environment Schemes.

It’s worth noting that there are some that argue that much of this subsidy is taken from food producers by others within the supply chain, and in particular the large retailers such as supermarkets. Others still argue that ultimately consumers benefit from cheaper food as a result of these subsidies. Both of these arguments are complex and I’m not going to go into the detail of them now.

£1.3Bn went to Regional Development Funds . These have now been wrapped up into one budget, which is spent via the Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs). The LEPs spend the money supporting local businesses in various different ways. For example 40% of the projected £3.6Bn LEP spend of EU money in the coming years will be spent “enhancing the competitiveness of small and medium enterprises (SMEs)”. SMEs have a turnover of up to £50M a year. As a comparison, 3% of the budget goes to projects “to preserve and protect the environment and promote resource efficiency”. £370M also went into the Social Fund, to support more employment, mostly by private businesses.

It’s also worth noting that £1.3Bn of EU funding went to UK private sector businesses to support research and development, but that this figure is not included in the calculations for the UK net contribution to the EU. If it was, our net contribution (for last year) would be reduced by 8.5%.

So it’s pretty clear from these figures that the direct beneficiaries of the £4.6Bn of EU funding last year are: landowners and other private businesses. A small amount of EU funding finds its way to the Public Sector and the Charity Sector, mainly to charities with large land ownerships such as the National Trust, who benefit from CAP subsidies.

It is true, for the average UK citizen, we pay into the EU budget via our taxes, and receive very little financial return. Most of the income from the EU goes to businesses of one sort or another. Is that a reason to leave the EU? I would suggest not.

I believe the EU can be a force for good if we can reclaim its social and environmental purpose. If it is downgraded to a single market then the arguments for staying in become much weaker.

But, to paraphrase a former US President “It’s not the economy, stupid”.
0
reply
SHallowvale
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#104
Report 2 years ago
#104
(Original post by Betelgeuse-)
27 million pro EU leaflets to be sent out next week at a cost of £9.3m pounds.

Disgusting

http://news.sky.com/story/1673902/go...ro-eu-leaflets
Why do you think this is disgusting?
0
reply
The_Dragon_
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#105
Report 2 years ago
#105
(Original post by the bear)
The people imploring us to leave the EU complain that we pay so much into the EU budget, but get so little back. It is true that last year the UK was the 3rd largest contributor to the EU budget, contributing 12.57% (after rebate), but still behind France and Germany, the largest contributor. It’s also true that we receive considerably less back from the EU than we pay in – last year the difference was £8.5Bn. This might sound like a lot, but the UK’s total Gross Domestic Product last year was £2000 Bn, so our net contribution to the EU was equivalent to 0.4% of GDP.

the UK making a net contribution to the EU budget is equivalent to London being a net contributor to the UK budget, while Cornwall is a net recipient. The UK is one of the wealthiest countries in the EU. Since the EU is not just a single market, but also has a social purpose, it seems right and proper that we contribute to make things better in poorer parts of Europe.

Who benefits directly from financial payments from the EU to the UK?

Of the £4.6Bn received last year, £3bn went straight to landowners, via the Common Agricultural Policy. Most of this was in the form of a single payment, paid to landowners whether they grow food or not. About 15% of it went to Rural Development and most of this was spent on Agri-Environment Schemes.

It’s worth noting that there are some that argue that much of this subsidy is taken from food producers by others within the supply chain, and in particular the large retailers such as supermarkets. Others still argue that ultimately consumers benefit from cheaper food as a result of these subsidies. Both of these arguments are complex and I’m not going to go into the detail of them now.

£1.3Bn went to Regional Development Funds . These have now been wrapped up into one budget, which is spent via the Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs). The LEPs spend the money supporting local businesses in various different ways. For example 40% of the projected £3.6Bn LEP spend of EU money in the coming years will be spent “enhancing the competitiveness of small and medium enterprises (SMEs)”. SMEs have a turnover of up to £50M a year. As a comparison, 3% of the budget goes to projects “to preserve and protect the environment and promote resource efficiency”. £370M also went into the Social Fund, to support more employment, mostly by private businesses.

It’s also worth noting that £1.3Bn of EU funding went to UK private sector businesses to support research and development, but that this figure is not included in the calculations for the UK net contribution to the EU. If it was, our net contribution (for last year) would be reduced by 8.5%.

So it’s pretty clear from these figures that the direct beneficiaries of the £4.6Bn of EU funding last year are: landowners and other private businesses. A small amount of EU funding finds its way to the Public Sector and the Charity Sector, mainly to charities with large land ownerships such as the National Trust, who benefit from CAP subsidies.

It is true, for the average UK citizen, we pay into the EU budget via our taxes, and receive very little financial return. Most of the income from the EU goes to businesses of one sort or another. Is that a reason to leave the EU? I would suggest not.

I believe the EU can be a force for good if we can reclaim its social and environmental purpose. If it is downgraded to a single market then the arguments for staying in become much weaker.

But, to paraphrase a former US President “It’s not the economy, stupid”.
It really isn't impressive to copy and paste internet pages - https://anewnatureblog.wordpress.com...omment-page-1/

The CAP is wholly inefficient and mostly props up wasteful French and Italian farmers; the cost to subsidise British farmers alone would be much cheaper.

Everything else you mentioned is effectively the taxpayer giving the EU some money, them keeping 40% of it for themselves and then telling us where to spend the rest of the money. The funding would continue but more efficient outside the EU.

There is no 'sociable EU', the entire organisation operates as a lobbying panel for mega corps; hence why JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs are throwing so much money behind the remain camp.
0
reply
The_Dragon_
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#106
Report 2 years ago
#106
(Original post by the bear)
High quality global journalism requires investment. Please share this article with others using the link below, do not cut & paste the article. See our Ts&Cs and Copyright Policy for more detail. Email [email protected] to buy additional rights. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8ba35856-c...#ixzz4595XS0kA
lol I give up :insert:
0
reply
paul514
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#107
Report 2 years ago
#107
(Original post by the bear)
The people imploring us to leave the EU complain that we pay so much into the EU budget, but get so little back. It is true that last year the UK was the 3rd largest contributor to the EU budget, contributing 12.57% (after rebate), but still behind France and Germany, the largest contributor. It’s also true that we receive considerably less back from the EU than we pay in – last year the difference was £8.5Bn. This might sound like a lot, but the UK’s total Gross Domestic Product last year was £2000 Bn, so our net contribution to the EU was equivalent to 0.4% of GDP.

the UK making a net contribution to the EU budget is equivalent to London being a net contributor to the UK budget, while Cornwall is a net recipient. The UK is one of the wealthiest countries in the EU. Since the EU is not just a single market, but also has a social purpose, it seems right and proper that we contribute to make things better in poorer parts of Europe.

Who benefits directly from financial payments from the EU to the UK?

Of the £4.6Bn received last year, £3bn went straight to landowners, via the Common Agricultural Policy. Most of this was in the form of a single payment, paid to landowners whether they grow food or not. About 15% of it went to Rural Development and most of this was spent on Agri-Environment Schemes.

It’s worth noting that there are some that argue that much of this subsidy is taken from food producers by others within the supply chain, and in particular the large retailers such as supermarkets. Others still argue that ultimately consumers benefit from cheaper food as a result of these subsidies. Both of these arguments are complex and I’m not going to go into the detail of them now.

£1.3Bn went to Regional Development Funds . These have now been wrapped up into one budget, which is spent via the Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs). The LEPs spend the money supporting local businesses in various different ways. For example 40% of the projected £3.6Bn LEP spend of EU money in the coming years will be spent “enhancing the competitiveness of small and medium enterprises (SMEs)”. SMEs have a turnover of up to £50M a year. As a comparison, 3% of the budget goes to projects “to preserve and protect the environment and promote resource efficiency”. £370M also went into the Social Fund, to support more employment, mostly by private businesses.

It’s also worth noting that £1.3Bn of EU funding went to UK private sector businesses to support research and development, but that this figure is not included in the calculations for the UK net contribution to the EU. If it was, our net contribution (for last year) would be reduced by 8.5%.

So it’s pretty clear from these figures that the direct beneficiaries of the £4.6Bn of EU funding last year are: landowners and other private businesses. A small amount of EU funding finds its way to the Public Sector and the Charity Sector, mainly to charities with large land ownerships such as the National Trust, who benefit from CAP subsidies.

It is true, for the average UK citizen, we pay into the EU budget via our taxes, and receive very little financial return. Most of the income from the EU goes to businesses of one sort or another. Is that a reason to leave the EU? I would suggest not.

I believe the EU can be a force for good if we can reclaim its social and environmental purpose. If it is downgraded to a single market then the arguments for staying in become much weaker.

But, to paraphrase a former US President “It’s not the economy, stupid”.
£8.5 billion is almost enough to get rid of every welfare cut the government has made.
The economy size may be two trillion pounds but the tax take isn't its less than half that and that is where EU payments are made from.

The size of payments has gone up a lot in 2016.

If you ask the public... What do they want to spend 8.5 billion on? A, Helping eastern Europeans or B, Spent on public services in the UK? Guess what nearly 100% of people would say.

You obviously see yourself as a European, whereas the vast majority of people in this country see themselves as British
0
reply
the bear
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#108
Report 2 years ago
#108
(Original post by paul514)
£8.5 billion is almost enough to get rid of every welfare cut the government has made.
The economy size may be two trillion pounds but the tax take isn't its less than half that and that is where EU payments are made from.

The size of payments has gone up a lot in 2016.

If you ask the public... What do they want to spend 8.5 billion on? A, Helping eastern Europeans or B, Spent on public services in the UK? Guess what nearly 100% of people would say.

You obviously see yourself as a European, whereas the vast majority of people in this country see themselves as British
if people can't afford things they should go without. i do.
0
reply
Virgili
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#109
Report 2 years ago
#109
You know how people work in this country. If the government tells me something it must be true, this is after they complain about it for years. It's the same with theguardian, they criticise foreign policy until something actually happens and then they support the government. Just a bunch of idiots really.
0
reply
username878267
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#110
Report 2 years ago
#110
The government spends tax payers money every day on policies it pursues. Yet suddenly this is a massive issue?

Again, do all those who care so much about this taxpayers money being wasted care about the recent mass scale of tax avoidance?
0
reply
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#111
Report 2 years ago
#111
(Original post by the bear)
if people can't afford things they should go without. i do.
Good to see you've joined the leave campaign.

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
the bear
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#112
Report 2 years ago
#112
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
Good to see you've joined the leave campaign.

Posted from TSR Mobile
hehehe... we can afford to stay in the EU club... there is so much we can do to cut waste & profligacy in this country.
0
reply
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#113
Report 2 years ago
#113
(Original post by the bear)
hehehe... we can afford to stay in the EU club... there is so much we can do to cut waste & profligacy in this country.
So we aren't running a £55bn deficit then?
0
reply
the bear
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#114
Report 2 years ago
#114
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
So we aren't running a £55bn deficit then?
i am sure your data is 100% accurate.

iirc the deficit towards the end of the previous labour government was £153.5 billion ?
0
reply
paul514
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#115
Report 2 years ago
#115
(Original post by the bear)
if people can't afford things they should go without. i do.
We can't afford foreign aid or the eu membership fee added together it cut cut our current deficit by 20 odd billion


Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
the bear
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#116
Report 2 years ago
#116
(Original post by paul514)
We can't afford foreign aid or the eu membership fee added together it cut cut our current deficit by 20 odd billion


Posted from TSR Mobile
what we cannot afford is to pay people to sit at home watching telly and eating crisps and burgers until they explode.
0
reply
CoffeeGeek
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#117
Report 2 years ago
#117
This is their suicidal note as someone else said. In or out either way David Cameron's reputation is going down because of this. If you're going to spend taxpayers' money on something like this at least put two perspectives to it. People say it wasn't paid by taxpayers' money, so what was it paid for by? Offshore funds? Pfft... this government is becoming a joke now.
0
reply
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#118
Report 2 years ago
#118
(Original post by the bear)
i am sure your data is 100% accurate.

iirc the deficit towards the end of the previous labour government was £153.5 billion ?
Only £1bn out, 2016-17 budge deficit of £56bn, so we cannot afford to pay for some stuff
1
reply
Roofas
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#119
Report 2 years ago
#119
(Original post by the bear)

the UK making a net contribution to the EU budget is equivalent to London being a net contributor to the UK budget, while Cornwall is a net recipient. The UK is one of the wealthiest countries in the EU. Since the EU is not just a single market, but also has a social purpose, it seems right and proper that we contribute to make things better in poorer parts of Europe.

+

I believe the EU can be a force for good if we can reclaim its social and environmental purpose. If it is downgraded to a single market then the arguments for staying in become much weaker.
The UK isn't some province to be economically drained to prop up unsustainable projects in Eastern and Southern Europe. British people should have a say in where their money is spent.

We have no connection or cultural ties to countries such as Hungary, Lithuania or potential EU nations in the mess of the Balkans such as Bosnia, Montenegro and Albania. We haven't got a shared history spanning two thousand years with these incredibly poor and backwards countries, the admittance of whom will even further damage European cohesion.

The EU is too big for its own good. A smaller union between only the North and Western countries would have been sustainable. This bloated union is rotting from the inside out and like a cancer is destroying all those connected to it.

I don't think the EU has ever been about social or environmental issues. This is a new phenomenon that has creeped up on us and is undoubtedly slowing down European economies and reducing our prosperity while China builds 2 coal-fuelled power plants a week.

Why should we curb our emissions so that the developing world can prosper at our expense?
0
reply
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#120
Report 2 years ago
#120
The electoral commission have now come down hard on the decision saying it should not have happened, and despite the EU itself not being big fans of referendums, or more specifically their result when they get the "wrong" result:
Name:  12932551_236995206653532_6621233422381471445_n.jpg
Views: 125
Size:  64.8 KB
Even their guidelines say "DO NOT DO THIS!!!"
Attachment 520315520317

The picture doesn't want to load properly, so point 13. on page 17 here http://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/d...-AD(2007)008-e
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Brexit: Given the chance now, would you vote leave or remain?

Remain (1047)
79.02%
Leave (278)
20.98%

Watched Threads

View All