It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


The British Rebate

page: 1

log in


posted on Jun, 13 2005 @ 05:24 PM
There's a big row going on at the moment over the British rebate and CAP reform (as if you hadn't noticed).

The argument on their side is that the rebate was agreed when Britain was in a much worse position than it is now. In a europe of 25 states this (apparently) means the smaller nations are effectively subsidising British membership despite the fact that even with the rebate we are one of the biggest net contributors.

Now, according to the figures i've seen, if we give up the rebate the net French contribution to the EU will be virtually nil. Does this seem fair? I can almost understand the Germans position on this because they are the largest contributor but the French receive billions in grants from the EU and they're not exactly what you'd consider to be 'under-developed'.

My opinion on this is that the UK rebate must remain and the CAP needs to be reformed to the benefit of the nations that actually need the assistance.

What do you guys think about it?

posted on Jun, 13 2005 @ 05:51 PM
I think it is a synthetic row designed to take the spotlight away from the "no" votes in the 'constitution' referenda and most especially the French "no" vote (which is how come Chriac is so vocal on this at the moment).

The EU budget is up for negotiation again in 2007, not mid 2005.

The British rebate has been raised even though nothing is going to happen without UK approval (we have full veto rights on the budget) and in turn Britain has raised the CAP and EU budget where again nothing is going to happen, because it is not due for and no-one is yet ready for the necessary large-scale and deep negotiation.

It's mere sideshow and gallery-playing IMO.

In a word, politics, I suppose.

posted on Jun, 13 2005 @ 06:17 PM
Actually, sminkey, the budget being discussed is for the period 2007-2013. The decision is due long before then and a deal is supposed to be reached at the summit this month.

Still reeling from recent French and Dutch rejections of the EU constitution, Europe faces the prospect of financial gridlock if it fails to reach a budget deal at a June 16-17 summit in Brussels.

Any delay in securing a deal would put urgently needed public investment in the poorer new member states at risk. The EU budget is 106.3 billion euros ($130 billion) this year.

EU budget

[edit on 13-6-2005 by Chris McGee]

posted on Jun, 14 2005 @ 07:07 AM

Originally posted by Chris McGee
Actually, sminkey, the budget being discussed is for the period 2007-2013.

- Oh, ok.

I keep hearing various dates, 2007 was yesterday, today I've heard 2013.
Various people are saying various things.

All the same, with the UK linking a review of the rebate to the EU budget (and CAP in particular) I think that guarantees nothing significant is going to happen for some time yet.

[edit on 14-6-2005 by sminkeypinkey]

posted on Jun, 14 2005 @ 08:35 AM

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
I think it is a synthetic row designed to take the spotlight away from the "no" votes in the 'constitution' referenda and most especially the French "no" vote (which is how come Chriac is so vocal on this at the moment).

I'm going to have to agree with sminkey, with the defeat of the constitution European leaders need to shine the light on something else, the rebate is ideal as it will get lots of media attention and attract discussion on both sides of the English Channel.

posted on Jun, 14 2005 @ 12:27 PM
I see what you're saying but they are supposed to agree the new EU budget at the summit in two days time. If Britain is forced to veto it, there's going to be a lot of trouble in the EU.

I agree that they've probably brought this up to try and deflect attention from the defunct constitution but i'm not sure they've really thought it through. Neither side will back down so the EU is going to be financially gridlocked until someone compromises.

The British won't give up the rebate and the French won't give up their handouts so where's the middle ground going to be?

Sheesh, talk about making a bad situation worse.

posted on Jun, 17 2005 @ 09:24 AM
What I see happening is that the issue, in a good old european tradition, will be put on hold till the next meeting.

[edit on 17-6-2005 by paperclip]

posted on Jun, 17 2005 @ 10:03 PM
I agree the rebate row is just a diversionary tactic, but feel it may yet backfire on the French.

The French seem to be using this as a way of re-asserting their 'Authority' in the EU (backed, as ever, by Germany). France presents the problem of the rebate and then 'fixes' it for all to see and rescues the EU budget. A sure sign of their leadership.

The problem is, France and Germany are crippled by their own domestic politics and poor economies. Likewise Italy. And so Britain, normally the outsider of the 'Big Four', might just take this chance to challenge France's authority over the EU's budget. Tony Blairs press conference tonight was a good start!

I think the rebate row is a chance for Britain to exert it's influence on the EU for once, though France hoped it would be the other way round. Let's hope Tony can keep it up in the face of so much opposition.

posted on Jul, 29 2005 @ 07:39 AM
Should a European cow be worth 157 times more than a poor African?

external image

Scrap the CAP

By Waldemar Ingdahl Published 07/20/2005

Quick, name the world's largest socialist economy. No, it is not China; it is the EU's Common Agricultural Policy, the notorious CAP.

Today, 44 percent of the EU's budget is spent on the CAP, costing European tax payers about €48 billion, for a sector that employs less than 5 percent of the population of the member states. The EU spends seven times more on the CAP than it does on research and development.

Recently, thanks to the EU's failed budget process, Britain's Prime Minister Tony Blair has brought reform of the CAP to the top of the bloc's agenda. He wants to dramatically alter the system, and re-negotiate it before the year 2013. This was vigorously opposed by Mariann Fischer Boel, the EU's agriculture commissioner, in a recent speech.

But the Commission as a whole favors reform, considering the possibility of using its upcoming CAP review process to reduce subsidy payments to individual farmers. Instead, the Commission proposes increasing payments for regional rural development, and introducing a limit of €300,000 for CAP payments. If approved, money will flow east to the poorest part of Europe. CAP reform seems inevitable, even if will be slow in coming. Nonetheless, the proposals are being fought and stalled by France, which receives some €10 billion in CAP subsidies every year.

ed. made image smaller and shrtened lengthy cut and paste

[edit on 29-7-2005 by DontTreadOnMe]

[edit on 29-7-2005 by DontTreadOnMe]


log in