It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Brexit is a Mess, how do we Fix it.

page: 49
14
<< 46  47  48    50  51  52 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 5 2018 @ 07:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: sapien82


maybe just easy access for going on holidays is really pretty much what any of us need !



Was that ever a problem?

We were going on holiday to the continent long before the EU.

Tourism has always been the bread and butter of Spain, Portugal,

Greece, Italy ... even before they had to have the

euro currency.


My children brushed up on their maths on currency exchange rates.




posted on Oct, 5 2018 @ 07:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Axius
I wonder what would happen if the UK requested a financial audit of Brussels to "ensure we paid what we owed".
I imagine that the risk of expenses and other financial scandals would be cause for a rapid change in the EU's approach to negotiations.

What do you guys/girls think?


The EU already is audited every year.


No. The eu court of auditors sign off the accounts, even when there are significant errors.
They never, ever, release the accounts for audit. Even a tiny little limited company has to have its accounts audited externally, failure to do so smacks of fraud.



posted on Oct, 5 2018 @ 07:28 AM
link   
a reply to: eletheia

It was never an issue, I'm saying that is what the common citizen gets from being in the EU I suppose
freedom of movement , I don't know what it was like pre EU , because I wasn't alive !

I assume that the EU made the process easier than it was before the EU as formed !

less border checks and visas for work etc



posted on Oct, 5 2018 @ 07:30 AM
link   
a reply to: SprocketUK

You'd think that a system the EU being set up as a benefit to the citizens that make up that vast body would be able to scrutinise the people that run it and the financial details which contribute to its success



posted on Oct, 5 2018 @ 07:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: SprocketUK

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Axius
I wonder what would happen if the UK requested a financial audit of Brussels to "ensure we paid what we owed".
I imagine that the risk of expenses and other financial scandals would be cause for a rapid change in the EU's approach to negotiations.

What do you guys/girls think?


The EU already is audited every year.


No. The eu court of auditors sign off the accounts, even when there are significant errors.
They never, ever, release the accounts for audit. Even a tiny little limited company has to have its accounts audited externally, failure to do so smacks of fraud.


The court of auditors is independent authority the same way as the NAO is an independent authority in the UK. Can you point to an external company audit for the UK accounts?

Its an entirely false claim that they sign off even when there are errors. What they do us highlight where they believe spending has been done outwith the EU guidelines. 80% of EU spending is done by national governments.



posted on Oct, 5 2018 @ 07:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: sapien82
a reply to: eletheia

It was never an issue, I'm saying that is what the common citizen gets from being in the EU I suppose
freedom of movement


Freedom of movement was never an issue, No visas required either

and cheap yearly passports was enough to get you almost anywhere!



I don't know what it was like pre EU , because I wasn't alive !



Well as I can speak from experience your getting it 'from the horses

mouth as it were.



I assume that the EU made the process easier than it was before the EU as formed !
less border checks and visas for work etc


You know what they say about making assumptions?


I have relatives living in France, Spain and Italy since before the EU.



posted on Oct, 5 2018 @ 07:56 AM
link   
From government uk site
4.1 Contents of your company’s accounts

Generally, accounts must include:

a profit and loss account (or income and expenditure account if the company is not trading for profit)a balance sheet signed by a director on behalf of the board and the printed name of that directornotes to the accountsgroup accounts (if appropriate)

And accounts must generally be accompanied by;

a directors’ report signed by a secretary or director and their printed name, including a business review (or strategic report) if the company does not qualify as smallan auditors’ report stating the name of the auditor and signed and dated by him (unless the company is exempt from audit).


fullfact.org...

Here's a table of all the errors and times that the eu own auditors signed off the accounts despite them failing the fair test.

And they still will not publish them for the people who pay the taxes to examine.

It's 2018 we deserve more openness, more democracy, more accountability. Not less




originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: SprocketUK

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Axius
I wonder what would happen if the UK requested a financial audit of Brussels to "ensure we paid what we owed".
I imagine that the risk of expenses and other financial scandals would be cause for a rapid change in the EU's approach to negotiations.

What do you guys/girls think?


The EU already is audited every year.


No. The eu court of auditors sign off the accounts, even when there are significant errors.
They never, ever, release the accounts for audit. Even a tiny little limited company has to have its accounts audited externally, failure to do so smacks of fraud.


The court of auditors is independent authority the same way as the NAO is an independent authority in the UK. Can you point to an external company audit for the UK accounts?

Its an entirely false claim that they sign off even when there are errors. What they do us highlight where they believe spending has been done outwith the EU guidelines. 80% of EU spending is done by national governments.




posted on Oct, 5 2018 @ 08:12 AM
link   
a reply to: eletheia

right so there is no real benefit to the EU citizen then , well to those from the UK at least
since that is all that really matters to the general person/family , since most of us don't run businesses that trade internationally
most of us just want to go somewhere warm for the summer instead of British wet summers !

So there really is no difference , or benefit from the EU for the common EU citizen !




edit on 5-10-2018 by sapien82 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2018 @ 08:14 AM
link   
a reply to: SprocketUK

Yes , if we are paying for it , then we should be able to scrutinise and criticise it , right down to the very last penny , or cent



posted on Oct, 5 2018 @ 08:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: SprocketUK
From government uk site
4.1 Contents of your company’s accounts

Generally, accounts must include:

a profit and loss account (or income and expenditure account if the company is not trading for profit)a balance sheet signed by a director on behalf of the board and the printed name of that directornotes to the accountsgroup accounts (if appropriate)

And accounts must generally be accompanied by;

a directors’ report signed by a secretary or director and their printed name, including a business review (or strategic report) if the company does not qualify as smallan auditors’ report stating the name of the auditor and signed and dated by him (unless the company is exempt from audit).


fullfact.org...

Here's a table of all the errors and times that the eu own auditors signed off the accounts despite them failing the fair test.

And they still will not publish them for the people who pay the taxes to examine.

It's 2018 we deserve more openness, more democracy, more accountability. Not less




originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: SprocketUK

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Axius
I wonder what would happen if the UK requested a financial audit of Brussels to "ensure we paid what we owed".
I imagine that the risk of expenses and other financial scandals would be cause for a rapid change in the EU's approach to negotiations.

What do you guys/girls think?


The EU already is audited every year.


No. The eu court of auditors sign off the accounts, even when there are significant errors.
They never, ever, release the accounts for audit. Even a tiny little limited company has to have its accounts audited externally, failure to do so smacks of fraud.


The court of auditors is independent authority the same way as the NAO is an independent authority in the UK. Can you point to an external company audit for the UK accounts?

Its an entirely false claim that they sign off even when there are errors. What they do us highlight where they believe spending has been done outwith the EU guidelines. 80% of EU spending is done by national governments.



The EU isn't a company just as the UK government isn't.

Here is the full article that your table comes from

fullfact.org...

Certainly worth reading in full.



posted on Oct, 5 2018 @ 08:17 AM
link   
a reply to: ScepticScot

Its still funded by tax payers, so surely any form of government , under FOI should have to disclose their records !



posted on Oct, 5 2018 @ 08:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: sapien82
a reply to: eletheia

right so there is no real benefit to the EU citizen then , well to those from the UK at least
since that is all that really matters to the general person/family , since most of us don't run businesses that trade internationally
most of us just want to go somewhere warm for the summer instead of British wet summers !

So there really is no difference , or benefit from the EU for the common EU citizen !




Apart from Right to travel and work in EU.

Human rights protections.

Consumer protections.

Massive economic benefits (more and better jobs).

Hardly anything really.....



posted on Oct, 5 2018 @ 08:19 AM
link   
a reply to: ScepticScot

I did read it and though it glosses over the accounting problem, it's there in black and white....and still, these accounts are kept from us, the people all we are allowed to see are the glossy bottom line stuff.
How is that right?
It's being ruled, not represented.

The EU is anti democracy writ large. There is no way that this is acceptable in this day.



posted on Oct, 5 2018 @ 08:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: sapien82
a reply to: ScepticScot

Its still funded by tax payers, so surely any form of government , under FOI should have to disclose their records !


The EU publishes it's accounts. You can download them.

You can also do freedom of information requests for individual documents.



posted on Oct, 5 2018 @ 08:25 AM
link   
a reply to: ScepticScot

Apparently that was already there before the EU though according to the horses mouth !(eletheia)

the right to travel and work in the EU ,before the EU was already a thing !

HUman rights protections, surely the British government afforded us these rights by being in the UN ?
as well as consumer protections

which economic benefits do you get directly as a member of the EU ?

and which jobs does the EU give to UK citizens who live in the UK , what jobs have they given us

I am not saying that there are no benefits to the common citizen, but what are they , that we have directly which were not already there pre EU , as granted to us by being a member state of the UN



posted on Oct, 5 2018 @ 08:26 AM
link   
a reply to: ScepticScot

Aye as I suspected , which means that the EU aren't withholding accounts as previously suggested



posted on Oct, 5 2018 @ 08:27 AM
link   
a reply to: SprocketUK

EU accounts are available online.

What do you think the article was glossing over?



posted on Oct, 5 2018 @ 08:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: SprocketUK
From government uk site
4.1 Contents of your company’s accounts

Generally, accounts must include:

a profit and loss account (or income and expenditure account if the company is not trading for profit)a balance sheet signed by a director on behalf of the board and the printed name of that directornotes to the accountsgroup accounts (if appropriate)

And accounts must generally be accompanied by;

a directors’ report signed by a secretary or director and their printed name, including a business review (or strategic report) if the company does not qualify as smallan auditors’ report stating the name of the auditor and signed and dated by him (unless the company is exempt from audit).


fullfact.org...

Here's a table of all the errors and times that the eu own auditors signed off the accounts despite them failing the fair test.

And they still will not publish them for the people who pay the taxes to examine.

It's 2018 we deserve more openness, more democracy, more accountability. Not less




originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: SprocketUK

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Axius
I wonder what would happen if the UK requested a financial audit of Brussels to "ensure we paid what we owed".
I imagine that the risk of expenses and other financial scandals would be cause for a rapid change in the EU's approach to negotiations.

What do you guys/girls think?


The EU already is audited every year.


No. The eu court of auditors sign off the accounts, even when there are significant errors.
They never, ever, release the accounts for audit. Even a tiny little limited company has to have its accounts audited externally, failure to do so smacks of fraud.


The court of auditors is independent authority the same way as the NAO is an independent authority in the UK. Can you point to an external company audit for the UK accounts?

Its an entirely false claim that they sign off even when there are errors. What they do us highlight where they believe spending has been done outwith the EU guidelines. 80% of EU spending is done by national governments.



The EU isn't a company just as the UK government isn't.

Here is the full article that your table comes from

fullfact.org...

Certainly worth reading in full.



According to the "Audits" that have been performed so far 2 - 3.1% of payments made by the EU are subject to error. Considering that the EU yearly budget is approximately €145 bn a year (2015), that would mean somewhere between €2.0 bn and €4.5 bn of payments are found to be in error.

To me this hints to corruption or an expenses scandal.



posted on Oct, 5 2018 @ 08:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: sapien82
a reply to: ScepticScot

Apparently that was already there before the EU though according to the horses mouth !(eletheia)

the right to travel and work in the EU ,before the EU was already a thing !

HUman rights protections, surely the British government afforded us these rights by being in the UN ?
as well as consumer protections

which economic benefits do you get directly as a member of the EU ?

and which jobs does the EU give to UK citizens who live in the UK , what jobs have they given us

I am not saying that there are no benefits to the common citizen, but what are they , that we have directly which were not already there pre EU , as granted to us by being a member state of the UN


There was no defined right to live or work. Even travel could require a visa.

UN human rights have no practical measure of enforcement. EU ones do.

EU membership contributes to the economy of the UK as a whole which means real jobs and income. Could we do better outside? Possibly, but the evidence suggests a much higher chance of doing worse.



posted on Oct, 5 2018 @ 08:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Axius

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: SprocketUK
From government uk site
4.1 Contents of your company’s accounts

Generally, accounts must include:

a profit and loss account (or income and expenditure account if the company is not trading for profit)a balance sheet signed by a director on behalf of the board and the printed name of that directornotes to the accountsgroup accounts (if appropriate)

And accounts must generally be accompanied by;

a directors’ report signed by a secretary or director and their printed name, including a business review (or strategic report) if the company does not qualify as smallan auditors’ report stating the name of the auditor and signed and dated by him (unless the company is exempt from audit).


fullfact.org...

Here's a table of all the errors and times that the eu own auditors signed off the accounts despite them failing the fair test.

And they still will not publish them for the people who pay the taxes to examine.

It's 2018 we deserve more openness, more democracy, more accountability. Not less




originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: SprocketUK

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Axius
I wonder what would happen if the UK requested a financial audit of Brussels to "ensure we paid what we owed".
I imagine that the risk of expenses and other financial scandals would be cause for a rapid change in the EU's approach to negotiations.

What do you guys/girls think?


The EU already is audited every year.


No. The eu court of auditors sign off the accounts, even when there are significant errors.
They never, ever, release the accounts for audit. Even a tiny little limited company has to have its accounts audited externally, failure to do so smacks of fraud.


The court of auditors is independent authority the same way as the NAO is an independent authority in the UK. Can you point to an external company audit for the UK accounts?

Its an entirely false claim that they sign off even when there are errors. What they do us highlight where they believe spending has been done outwith the EU guidelines. 80% of EU spending is done by national governments.



The EU isn't a company just as the UK government isn't.

Here is the full article that your table comes from

fullfact.org...

Certainly worth reading in full.



According to the "Audits" that have been performed so far 2 - 3.1% of payments made by the EU are subject to error. Considering that the EU yearly budget is approximately €145 bn a year (2015), that would mean somewhere between €2.0 bn and €4.5 bn of payments are found to be in error.

To me this hints to corruption or an expenses scandal.



If you read the article linked it discusses that and how it compares to national governments.

The majority of that 3 % is not following EU guidelines. Not fraud.

Also 80% of EU spending is conducted by national governments, so we might want to look closer to home for the fault.



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 46  47  48    50  51  52 >>

log in

join