£1.7million. What are we actually paying for?

[3littlefrogs]

Please can someone explain what this bill is for?
Goods?
Services?
I genuinely don't know, so would be grateful if someone better informed could explain.
Thanks

Also I think your daily figure is wrong WetAugust

fullfact.org/economy/cost_eu_membership_gross_net_contribution-30887

What's the amount that individuals pay have to do with it?

I think it's very important. Because often we hear the tired old argument that "Oh £xxx would pay for loads of nurses/teachers" or variation of such.

But the "moneysaving" argument sort of falls flat when you see that actually we only pay 0.1% of our taxes towards the EU whilst we pay (for example) 25% towards welfare.

So if you were actually serious about saving money then it would make far more sense to examine the big spending items first.

Let's be honest, it's just a crock of shit peddled out to suit your political leanings.

1.7 billion seems a lot to me if the system is unfair and we don't know what we're paying for out of our pot.

Why do the Germans and French get a rebate again?

Ikanta

Have you not grasped yet how contributions are calculated?

No. But I assume it's unfair if that's what the government say.

Since the government agreed with all the other nations how the contributions would be calculated, and since the government provided the figures with which the calculation was to be made, I doubt that the government has said anything quite so clear.

If the government isn't happy about the situation, and say they're not paying up, why would that be?

Is it unfair - even if at some point they did agree about calculations? Maybe they've changed their minds and for a good reason.

Or maybe it's a populist rant to appeal to the Daily-Mail reading anti-European Conservative voters, in an attempt to out-UKIP UKIP.

Is there an election coming up?

Just 182 days, pigletjohn!

"I assume it's unfair if that's what the government say"

Do you know, I think that's the first time I've heard anyone say that? Usually they say, "What are those lying bastards lying to us about now?"

Right. Well I like to keep an open mind.

Does anyone know the truth? Surely it can't be all be lies just to get the UKIP vote?

You mean, apart from the truth that the UK government agreed with all the other nations how the contributions would be calculated? And the truth that the UK government provided the figures on which the contribution is based?

What are the other points that you suspect might be electioneering lies?

You tell me Piglet.

I don't know what the truth is, but I take your thoughts on board.

Piglet John is right, the Uk Government agreed the calculation method and provided the information the figures are calculated on. Surely there are statisticians/analysts capable of doing these calculations themselves in the Government so it wouldn't (well shouldn't...) have been a shock

And the Uk get a rebate too Inkanta news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8036802.stm

school

The link you posted that states 55 million a day was in Mar 14. You'll have noticed that we are now having to pay a extra billion or so.

WetAugust I was pointing out that your 66m a day figure or indeed 55m figure is wrong. Even adding in the extra it's still wrong. It's a figure commonly used by UKIP but doesn't take account of the UK rebate or EU funds received by the UK eg agricultural receipts.

If I was calculating the cost of anything I'd look at the net cost, not the gross cost figures you are using.

We err not talking net contribution. we were a talking about how much the UK pays to the EU.

There's a piece in the Telegraph today saying that the EU auditors have not signed off the accounts. I cannot link to it as I'm on an ipad and don't know how to.

It's disingenuous to outline only what the UK pays the EU and not mention the money received back. It tells only half the story.

Here's the telegraph article

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/11209248/EU-auditors-refuse-to-sign-off-more-than-100billion-of-its-own-spending.html

Here's two other articles, which state that, as has been the case for a number of years, the auditors have signed off on the accounts

www.rttnews.com/2410833/european-court-of-auditors-give-clean-bill-of-health-on-eu-budget-management.aspx?type=gn&utm_source=google&utm_campaign=sitemap&simrec=2

www.euractiv.com/sections/euro-finance/eu-auditors-push-more-oversight-and-smarter-spending-309787

I love the way athat weve been talking about the actual amount of contributions until you decided that I was being disingenuous in not declaring the net contribution. I would suggest you're trying to downplay the amount. Anyway, it could be millions and millions more if Cameron doesn't get his cheque book out soon.

So the Press can't agree on whether the accounts have/have not been audited. Just shows you cannot trust the Press. I suppose if you are rabidly anti-EU oike I am, you'll believe the Telegraph. If you are in a different camp you can console yourself that every penny/Euro has been accounted for and is jolly good value for money.

Personally I would not give the EU one solitary penny.

Thanks for putting me onto Adrian Hilton. I am enjoying reading his stuff.

Glad to help I guess re Hilton although I don't know anything about him other than him being the source of the quote you posted earlier!

Re disingenuous I think the best way to look at the figures is what is the actual net 'cost' to the UK (not taking into account things like trade benefits etc but just looking at the money). I'm not saying you can't make an argument as to what you think the money could otherwise be spent on, just that the figure isn't as high as the one you were using.

''Disingenuous, is a party that is called the United Kingdom Independence Party, that has campaigned for over 20-years on that mono issue, now sensing Westminster power, is politically doing its level best that we don't have an EU Referendum - while their minions pretend they do.

“Farage backs Miliband for PM; UKIP wants Labour to win the next General Election because it fears Cameron could win an EU Referendum.”
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2793688/farage-backs-miliband-ukip-want-labour-win-election-fear-cameron-win-eu-referendum.html

• Ukip have conceded privately they would prefer Labour to win next election
• Party thinks a PM Miliband less likely to win a referendum than Cameron
• Ukip claims it now poses an equal threat to Labour and Conservative
• But pollsters say a Ukip surge is likely to hand Labour victory over Tories

Honestly Isitmebut. You do write garbage at time. You say that UKIP have conceded privately that their actions would result in. Labour victory?

Were you there to her this private conversation?

Thought not.

If you follow the party's electoral literature it clearly states Vote UKIP, Get UKIP.

Anyway, milliband is going to lose this election. Even the New Statesman pulled the plug today. They have obviously decided that losing the GE would be preferable to winning an election and being stuck with Ed for at least the next 5 years.

Anyway, this thread is about how much money we hand to the EU, There are other threads on UKIP.

WetAugust .... FYI I am not a reporter for the Daily Mail, I did not hear the 'private conversation', I wouldn't have to, based on the UKIP's best efforts to win seats from the ONLY party offering a democratic referendum.

As to what UKIP party literature (or your glorious leader) says, similar to your GE manifestos, they change with the wind.
www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nigel-farage-would-do-a-deal-with-the-devil-to-get-eu-referendum-9407651.html

The point is, while UKIP bang on about the EU, our contributions, and democracy - UKIP wants no such thing until well AFTER you have your feet firmly under the Westminster table - as what is the point of a United Kingdom Independence Party with no credible UK domestic policies, once a referendum was held.

Point made, you can now continue to pretend leaving the EU and our contributions, is more important than Westminster power - fire away.

Good bloke. I'd do a deal with the Devil too for a referendum, so we do have something in common.

Thats the politics of conviction for you. Unlike Dave and Ed who want power and then will work out what to do with it.

UKIP/Farage's democratic focus is not a referendum as a means to achieve what they have been banging on about for 21-years e.g. for the UK to leave the EU, it is, as seen with your first MP, a new mono policy of MP Recall - where UKIP can use it's social media purple minions, to try install sub standard UPIP candidates via the back door, that couldn't get into a seat via general or by-election front doors.

Osbourne cutting the £1.7 billion bill in half, more time to pay, interest free and no future 're basing' of an economy retro big bills ever again - no doubt EU 'smoke and mirrors' in there somewhere - but where is the scam this time?