KEYWORDS TODAY: Crimea
British people will be given the opportunity to "have their say" on Europe in an in/out referendum if the Conservatives win the election, Prime Minister David Cameron has pledged in a key address.
Speaking from the Bloomberg headquarters in central London, the prime minister said he wanted to renegotiate the UK's relationship with the EU and then give people the "simple choice" between staying in under those new terms, or leaving the EU.
In Britain today, "public disillusionment with the EU is at an all-time high," Cameron said, citing regulations and directives out of Brussels that many Britons consider onerous and unnecessary....
The executives complained about the red tape burden imposed by Brussels, and claimed it was the right moment "to push for a more competitive, flexible and prosperous European Union that would bring more jobs and growth for all member states".
So says an advertisement in a UK newspaper today put there by 50 of the UK's top businessmen and commercial organisations. This will be the nub of the UK thrust. It is totally unreasonable and untrue for Cameron to infer he (or anyone in the UK) can negotiate a better deal for the UK alone, one member cannot be treated in isolation. It is true, however, for the UK to spearhead a new deal for the whole of Europe with less red tape and more power back to member states, that would be perfectly reasonable and acceptable, in fact, it already has some support from the likes of Norway, Czech Rep and even Spain. If the UK's aim is as the first paragraph says then it deserves the full support of all member states. I travel Europe and have heard this moan in many EU member countries.
Cameron's words and his tone is tailor made for his UK audience but his aim will be good for the whole of Europe which is currently in the grip of Eurocrats and the ECHR, they need their powers clipped and more democracy in the EU needs to be supported.
I wonder if Camoron's referendum will be open to everyone to vote on or if he will finally get round to showing a bit of sense?
Letting pig-ignorant and illiterate Brits vote on issues they lack the brains to even vaguely understand simply opens the doors to populist rabble-rousers like the unfunny comedian Führer Farage and his ilk. It's long past time that voting in the UK is restricted to those who can demonstrate that they can read and write, comprehend the issues (rather than simply parrot the dross dished out to them by the UK red-tops) - AND can prove they are making, or have made, a contribution to the economy rather than sponging off the State for generation after generation.....
Seedy, if this is your real view and you are not just playing "Devil's advocate" then, if you are speaking from experience, you must have been brought up amongst the very lowest of society. Believe me, there are some very intelligent people in the UK (as in any country). To have a country in the top 8 economies in the world (UK chairs G8 this time around) and to be the 2nd biggest net contributor to the EU (Germany 9+billion, UK 5+b & France & Italy 3+b each) does take just a bit of savvy to keep us that influential. I suggest your look up and broaden your horizons and see the big picture and the real world. Have fun!!!!!!!
...not mine, but wouldn't "UK is one of the biggest net contributor to the EU" be more correct? ;-)
"According to the European Commission, the largest net contributors include Germany (at 9 billion euros), France (6.4 billion), Italy (5.9 billion), Great Britain (5.6 billion) and the Netherlands (2.2 billion)." :
I don't recall suggesting that ALL Brits conform to the description I gave but, unless you have been living in Shangri-la, then you'll have to concede that it DOES describe all too many of them. It also won't have escaped your attention that a large percentage of Brits are unable to pass the "Life in the UK" test, which is now required of all applicants for settlement or British Citizenship.
My points are simple:
1 - no representation without contribution.
2 - proof of the ability to read, write and understand the issues involved before being given the "right" to vote.
I appreciate that some people have the insane notion that it's okay for social security spongers, criminals, illiterates etc to be allowed to decide the future of the citizens of your once-illustrious country but maybe that's one of the reasons why it's such a laughing-stock these days.....
Feel free to continue your rather limp-wristed efforts to "insult" me but, my dear old fruit, do try to work on your logic and tenuous grasp of English a bit more. If the latter gets much worse you'll be in grave danger of being taken for a native Brit red-top "reader" or UKIP-voter...both of whom are noted for moving their lips as they attempt to read. ;)
As you are clearly an intellectually retarded, rabble rousing Daily Mail "hang 'em and flog 'em" little Englander, I thought you would be rather enamoured by my comparisons of you with your fascist continental equivalents who share the same ideology and solutions as you.
Sa-Sha, nice to be sparring with you again. My comment did say "net contribution" that means money paid back in the form of grants, projects etc, including the UK rebate. Take all that into account and, the last published figures are as follows...........
Member State Total Contribution
in Euro Total Contribution
as % of total EU budget Total Expenditure
year 2006 in Euro Total Expenditure
as % of total EU budget Net Contribution
European Union 105 259 468 772 100.00% 106 575 500 000 100.00% -1 316 031 228
Germany 22 218 438 941 21.11% 12 242 400 000 11.49% 9 976 038 941
France 17 303 107 859 16.44% 13 496 200 000 12.66% 3 806 907 859
Italy 14 359 479 157 13.64% 10 922 300 000 10.25% 3 437 179 157
United Kingdom 13 739 900 046 13.05% 8 294 200 000 7.78% 5 445 700 046
Bit hard to decipher as pasted but just go into the accounts (or view on Wkipedia) and you will see what I mean, it's the last figure in the above for each country that is the net contribution.
Peter, so many figures/numbers ;-) but:
(1)My comment was just about "net contributors"(check my link again)
(2) viki is not the certain source for me,
(3) methodics differ....and GB may be № 2, №3, №4 and even out of the "five biggest" NET contributors (and imho "Net Contributor per
each individual EU citizen" is more correct approach...do ask Your wife,
Peter, more or less money from Your family' budjet she's ready to
give "for the Common ;-) European Wealth"? And if to accept this
"per person" NET contribution, then UK is not even among 5 strongest ones..........
That's why I wrote "UK is ONE OF the biggest net contributor to the EU" ;-)
Bulgaria's Ludogorets Oust Lazio in Europa League
Clashes in Ukraine's Crimea Region