Joined: May 25 2002 Posts: 37704 Location: Zummerzet, where the zoider apples grow
Staffs FC wrote: Wasn't that the guy who gave away a huge part of our rebate in exchange for an overhaul of the CAP ? Wasn't that the overhaul of the CAP that never actually happened ? A true titan.
Dunno but all that link shows is that something was being considered/proposed.
Maybe you could provide a link that actually backs up your wild assertions?
Staffs FC wrote: Wasn't that the guy who gave away a huge part of our rebate in exchange for an overhaul of the CAP ? Wasn't that the overhaul of the CAP that never actually happened ? A true titan.
Dunno but all that link shows is that something was being considered/proposed.
Maybe you could provide a link that actually backs up your wild assertions?
The older I get, the better I was
Advice is what we seek when we already know the answer - but wish we didn't
I'd rather have a full bottle in front of me than a full-frontal lobotomy ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ kirkstaller wrote: "All DNA shows is that we have a common creator."
cod'ead wrote: "I have just snotted weissbier all over my keyboard & screen"
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "No amount of cajolery, and no attempts at ethical or social seduction, can eradicate from my heart a deep burning hatred for the Tory Party. So far as I am concerned they are lower than vermin." - Aneurin Bevan
Joined: Feb 12 2005 Posts: 13126 Location: East Staffordshire
cod'ead wrote:
Staffs FC wrote: Wasn't that the guy who gave away a huge part of our rebate in exchange for an overhaul of the CAP ? Wasn't that the overhaul of the CAP that never actually happened ? A true titan.
Dunno but all that link shows is that something was being considered/proposed.
Maybe you could provide a link that actually backs up your wild assertions?
wild assertions .I thought it was fairly common knowledge.
In fairness Blair was talking tough before the Dec 2005 summit and did his best to take on Chirac.
However he didn't want to be seen as a failure in his EU presidency year so agreed to give a big chunk of rebate in exchange for some woolly arrangement that the entire EU budget structure, including the CAP, would be renegotiated in coming years.
"- In 2005, Tony Blair agreed to give away a portion of the UK rebate in return for reform of the Common Agricultural Policy, which never materialised. The effects of that decision are only now being felt as the cut to the rebate is being fully phased in. As a result, the UK's net contribution to the EU is expected to rise from £6.4bn in 2009-10 to £10.3bn in 2014-15[4].
- Over a ten year period from 2004-5 to 2014-15, the UK's net contribution will have risen from £3.9bn[5] to £10.3bn, a 260% increase. Any further reduction to the UK rebate would see the UK's net contribution rise to yet more unacceptable levels."
Full credit to Chirac though - he defended his country's main interest admirably (a course of action that no doubt delighted his countrymen). He must have wet himself laughing at how easy it was to get the UK to pay in more and give absolutely nothing in return. Blair of course was more interested in avoiding personal failure (as the then EU president) than protecting our interests. A true Titan as someone else said He must have had them all locked in a room for weeks to get that one through
How those extra billions would be handy right now.
cod'ead wrote:
Staffs FC wrote: Wasn't that the guy who gave away a huge part of our rebate in exchange for an overhaul of the CAP ? Wasn't that the overhaul of the CAP that never actually happened ? A true titan.
Dunno but all that link shows is that something was being considered/proposed.
Maybe you could provide a link that actually backs up your wild assertions?
wild assertions .I thought it was fairly common knowledge.
In fairness Blair was talking tough before the Dec 2005 summit and did his best to take on Chirac.
However he didn't want to be seen as a failure in his EU presidency year so agreed to give a big chunk of rebate in exchange for some woolly arrangement that the entire EU budget structure, including the CAP, would be renegotiated in coming years.
"- In 2005, Tony Blair agreed to give away a portion of the UK rebate in return for reform of the Common Agricultural Policy, which never materialised. The effects of that decision are only now being felt as the cut to the rebate is being fully phased in. As a result, the UK's net contribution to the EU is expected to rise from £6.4bn in 2009-10 to £10.3bn in 2014-15[4].
- Over a ten year period from 2004-5 to 2014-15, the UK's net contribution will have risen from £3.9bn[5] to £10.3bn, a 260% increase. Any further reduction to the UK rebate would see the UK's net contribution rise to yet more unacceptable levels."
Full credit to Chirac though - he defended his country's main interest admirably (a course of action that no doubt delighted his countrymen). He must have wet himself laughing at how easy it was to get the UK to pay in more and give absolutely nothing in return. Blair of course was more interested in avoiding personal failure (as the then EU president) than protecting our interests. A true Titan as someone else said He must have had them all locked in a room for weeks to get that one through
How those extra billions would be handy right now.
"To play your best football you need players with enthusiasm and drive and energy." - Peter Sterling
Adam Pearson said not wrote:I know there are two franchises and two clubs (in Hull) and that will remain forever more
Joined: Jul 31 2003 Posts: 36786 Location: Leafy Worcester, home of the Black Pear
Staffs FC wrote:
cod'ead wrote:
Staffs FC wrote: Wasn't that the guy who gave away a huge part of our rebate in exchange for an overhaul of the CAP ? Wasn't that the overhaul of the CAP that never actually happened ? A true titan.
Dunno but all that link shows is that something was being considered/proposed.
Maybe you could provide a link that actually backs up your wild assertions?
wild assertions .I thought it was fairly common knowledge.
In fairness Blair was talking tough before the Dec 2005 summit and did his best to take on Chirac.
However he didn't want to be seen as a failure in his EU presidency year so agreed to give a big chunk of rebate in exchange for some woolly arrangement that the entire EU budget structure, including the CAP, would be renegotiated in coming years.
"- In 2005, Tony Blair agreed to give away a portion of the UK rebate in return for reform of the Common Agricultural Policy, which never materialised. The effects of that decision are only now being felt as the cut to the rebate is being fully phased in. As a result, the UK's net contribution to the EU is expected to rise from £6.4bn in 2009-10 to £10.3bn in 2014-15[4].
- Over a ten year period from 2004-5 to 2014-15, the UK's net contribution will have risen from £3.9bn[5] to £10.3bn, a 260% increase. Any further reduction to the UK rebate would see the UK's net contribution rise to yet more unacceptable levels."
Full credit to Chirac though - he defended his country's main interest admirably (a course of action that no doubt delighted his countrymen). He must have wet himself laughing at how easy it was to get the UK to pay in more and give absolutely nothing in return. Blair of course was more interested in avoiding personal failure (as the then EU president) than protecting our interests. A true Titan as someone else said He must have had them all locked in a room for weeks to get that one through
How those extra billions would be handy right now.
Quotes from an openly Euro-sceptic website don't really constitute proof of anything much. Wikipedia (not a definitive source admittedly) says this:
Quote: In December 2005 the UK Prime Minister Tony Blair agreed to give up approximately 20% of the rebate for the period 2007-2013, on condition that the funds did not contribute to CAP payments, were matched by contributions from other countries and were only for the new member states. Spending on the CAP remained fixed, as had previously been agreed. Overall, this reduced the proportion of the budget spent on the CAP. It was agreed that the European Commission should conduct a full review of all EU spending.
So 20% of the rebate is 'suspended' in effect up until 2013 and in return less of the EU budget is spent on the CAP (the original reason for us getting a rebate) and the funding from the 20% goes only to the poorer states in the EU - not France. And since France is one of the largest beneficiaries of the CAP I don't really see how Chirac defended his country's interests at the expense of ours. Not exactly the capitulation that 'Open Europe' would have you think.
Cameron isn't fit to lace Blair's shoes on the diplomacy front. Or the shoes of any other Prime Minister in my lifetime come to that. He's a numpty.
Staffs FC wrote:
cod'ead wrote:
Staffs FC wrote: Wasn't that the guy who gave away a huge part of our rebate in exchange for an overhaul of the CAP ? Wasn't that the overhaul of the CAP that never actually happened ? A true titan.
Dunno but all that link shows is that something was being considered/proposed.
Maybe you could provide a link that actually backs up your wild assertions?
wild assertions .I thought it was fairly common knowledge.
In fairness Blair was talking tough before the Dec 2005 summit and did his best to take on Chirac.
However he didn't want to be seen as a failure in his EU presidency year so agreed to give a big chunk of rebate in exchange for some woolly arrangement that the entire EU budget structure, including the CAP, would be renegotiated in coming years.
"- In 2005, Tony Blair agreed to give away a portion of the UK rebate in return for reform of the Common Agricultural Policy, which never materialised. The effects of that decision are only now being felt as the cut to the rebate is being fully phased in. As a result, the UK's net contribution to the EU is expected to rise from £6.4bn in 2009-10 to £10.3bn in 2014-15[4].
- Over a ten year period from 2004-5 to 2014-15, the UK's net contribution will have risen from £3.9bn[5] to £10.3bn, a 260% increase. Any further reduction to the UK rebate would see the UK's net contribution rise to yet more unacceptable levels."
Full credit to Chirac though - he defended his country's main interest admirably (a course of action that no doubt delighted his countrymen). He must have wet himself laughing at how easy it was to get the UK to pay in more and give absolutely nothing in return. Blair of course was more interested in avoiding personal failure (as the then EU president) than protecting our interests. A true Titan as someone else said He must have had them all locked in a room for weeks to get that one through
How those extra billions would be handy right now.
Quotes from an openly Euro-sceptic website don't really constitute proof of anything much. Wikipedia (not a definitive source admittedly) says this:
Quote: In December 2005 the UK Prime Minister Tony Blair agreed to give up approximately 20% of the rebate for the period 2007-2013, on condition that the funds did not contribute to CAP payments, were matched by contributions from other countries and were only for the new member states. Spending on the CAP remained fixed, as had previously been agreed. Overall, this reduced the proportion of the budget spent on the CAP. It was agreed that the European Commission should conduct a full review of all EU spending.
So 20% of the rebate is 'suspended' in effect up until 2013 and in return less of the EU budget is spent on the CAP (the original reason for us getting a rebate) and the funding from the 20% goes only to the poorer states in the EU - not France. And since France is one of the largest beneficiaries of the CAP I don't really see how Chirac defended his country's interests at the expense of ours. Not exactly the capitulation that 'Open Europe' would have you think.
Cameron isn't fit to lace Blair's shoes on the diplomacy front. Or the shoes of any other Prime Minister in my lifetime come to that. He's a numpty.
Hold on to me baby, his bony hands will do you no harm It said in the cards, we lost our souls to the Nameless One
Joined: May 25 2002 Posts: 37704 Location: Zummerzet, where the zoider apples grow
Staffs FC wrote: How those extra billions would be handy right now.
Not nearly as handy as the £bns we threw at the banks
The older I get, the better I was
Advice is what we seek when we already know the answer - but wish we didn't
I'd rather have a full bottle in front of me than a full-frontal lobotomy ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ kirkstaller wrote: "All DNA shows is that we have a common creator."
cod'ead wrote: "I have just snotted weissbier all over my keyboard & screen"
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "No amount of cajolery, and no attempts at ethical or social seduction, can eradicate from my heart a deep burning hatred for the Tory Party. So far as I am concerned they are lower than vermin." - Aneurin Bevan
"- In 2005, Tony Blair agreed to give away a portion of the UK rebate in return for reform of the Common Agricultural Policy, which never materialised. The effects of that decision are only now being felt as the cut to the rebate is being fully phased in. As a result, the UK's net contribution to the EU is expected to rise from £6.4bn in 2009-10 to £10.3bn in 2014-15[4].
- Over a ten year period from 2004-5 to 2014-15, the UK's net contribution will have risen from £3.9bn[5] to £10.3bn, a 260% increase. Any further reduction to the UK rebate would see the UK's net contribution rise to yet more unacceptable levels."
A couple of other points about those figures...
The 20% reduction in our rebate runs out in 2013, so I'm not sure how he can be blamed for rises in 2014 and beyond.
These figures are forecasts. The EU budget beyond 2013 hasn't even been negotiated yet.
Using the net transfer is slightly misleading since ALL countries in the EU have contributed increasing amounts to the EU budget over that period, so only a proportion of the increase in our net contribution is attributable to the deal that Blair did. They also fail to mention that the deal is responsible in part for the proportion of the budget spent on the cap dropping from close to 80% down to roughly 40% or thereabouts.
"- In 2005, Tony Blair agreed to give away a portion of the UK rebate in return for reform of the Common Agricultural Policy, which never materialised. The effects of that decision are only now being felt as the cut to the rebate is being fully phased in. As a result, the UK's net contribution to the EU is expected to rise from £6.4bn in 2009-10 to £10.3bn in 2014-15[4].
- Over a ten year period from 2004-5 to 2014-15, the UK's net contribution will have risen from £3.9bn[5] to £10.3bn, a 260% increase. Any further reduction to the UK rebate would see the UK's net contribution rise to yet more unacceptable levels."
A couple of other points about those figures...
The 20% reduction in our rebate runs out in 2013, so I'm not sure how he can be blamed for rises in 2014 and beyond.
These figures are forecasts. The EU budget beyond 2013 hasn't even been negotiated yet.
Using the net transfer is slightly misleading since ALL countries in the EU have contributed increasing amounts to the EU budget over that period, so only a proportion of the increase in our net contribution is attributable to the deal that Blair did. They also fail to mention that the deal is responsible in part for the proportion of the budget spent on the cap dropping from close to 80% down to roughly 40% or thereabouts.
Hold on to me baby, his bony hands will do you no harm It said in the cards, we lost our souls to the Nameless One
Joined: Mar 08 2002 Posts: 26578 Location: On the set of NEDS...
Kosh wrote:A couple of other points about those figures...
The 20% reduction in our rebate runs out in 2013, so I'm not sure how he can be blamed for rises in 2014 and beyond.
These figures are forecasts. The EU budget beyond 2013 hasn't even been negotiated yet.
Using the net transfer is slightly misleading since ALL countries in the EU have contributed increasing amounts to the EU budget over that period, so only a proportion of the increase in our net contribution is attributable to the deal that Blair did. They also fail to mention that the deal is responsible in part for the proportion of the budget spent on the cap dropping from close to 80% down to roughly 40% or thereabouts.
Euro-sceptic think tank (independent my backside) twists figures to suit their agenda shock!
Joined: Sep 22 2011 Posts: 833 Location: Waiting for a pint in West London
Cameron isn't fit to lace Blair's shoes on the diplomacy front. Or the shoes of any other Prime Minister in my lifetime come to that. He's a numpty.[/quote]
So Gordon " Don't panic brown" is a testament to this is he?
This year I want to see Us going forward in the last 5 minutes even if we are 40 points up.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 293 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
wild assertions 
