NationStates Jolt Archive

Well, Merkel did a good job...

And that was pretty much it. The Brits gave up 10.5b Euros of their rebate (good), but agricultural talks were postponed until 08/09 (very bad!).

Overall, an increase in the total amount of money the EU spends, such that it is now 1.045% of total GDP.

Eastern Europe will profit from the payments a lot (similarly to Ireland in the Nineties...and it really helped them), so they're pretty happy.

And we are left with no real agreement, but simply a compromise which will last about two weeks until someone opens their mouth again. And it's not really a help for the WTO either.

http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/NewsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2005-12-17T043826Z_01_SPI384717_RTRUKOC_0_UK-EU-BUDGET.xml

So does that mean the Hong Kong round is now going to end in failure?

So does that mean the Hong Kong round is now going to end in failure?
Well, I'd consider anything less than both sides completely dropping their isolationism a failure.
No idea what exactly comes out of it, but I think it's pretty clear that the EU won't end its current subsidy programs in time with the Hong Kong suggestions.

Well, I'd consider anything less than both sides completely dropping their isolationism a failure.
No idea what exactly comes out of it, but I think it's pretty clear that the EU won't end its current subsidy programs in time with the Hong Kong suggestions.

That sucks, because the US won't move on cotton subsidies then. Personally, I think the US should just do it anyway, like they promised, and hope that the goodwill it generates in Africa can help limit the free rider problem with Europe.

Bump.

Because this is a potentially interesting topic.

Well, Merkel did a good job...

And that was pretty much it. The Brits gave up 10.5b Euros of their rebate (good), but agricultural talks were postponed until 08/09 (very bad!).

Overall, an increase in the total amount of money the EU spends, such that it is now 1.045% of total GDP.

Eastern Europe will profit from the payments a lot (similarly to Ireland in the Nineties...and it really helped them), so they're pretty happy.

And we are left with no real agreement, but simply a compromise which will last about two weeks until someone opens their mouth again. And it's not really a help for the WTO either.

http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/NewsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2005-12-17T043826Z_01_SPI384717_RTRUKOC_0_UK-EU-BUDGET.xml

And you know that if they completely got rid of agricultural subsidises, they could have a whole lot more money to spend on worthwhile things - besides giving welfare to Pierre and Luiggi who thinks its their right to live off the back of the EU tax payer.

Expansion of government = generally bad

The biggest contributors in percentages of GDP (2007-2013):

Germany (0,43)
Sweden (0,40)
France (0,38)
Netherlands (0,38)
Italy (0,37)
Finland (0,34)
Austria (0,32)
Denmark (0,30)
(Source: svt.se)

We're no longer number one, thanks to Germany opening its wallet. I guess that's good for us, but overall I'm disappointed. The agriculture subsidies have to go.

Well, Merkel did a good job...

And that was pretty much it. The Brits gave up 10.5b Euros of their rebate (good), but agricultural talks were postponed until 08/09 (very bad!).


Less of 'the Brits', more of 'Tony Blair'.

Bastard!

That's our money he's giving away, and what did he buy with it? Sod all! Ephemeral good will? Oh, what a _wotherwhile_ investment that is. Didn't get CAP reformulated, just gave away chunks of the rebate, great.

Tosser.

Elgesh']Less of 'the Brits', more of 'Tony Blair'.

It's bussiness. We'll send to the UK more stuff, and he will give us 500 million€ more until 2013. If the UK didn't reduce the budget, I hadn't see any justice at all, because the UK had received the same while poorer countries (read Spain, Austria, Protugal, Ireland) had paid most of the costs of the new members budgets...

And Germany has reduced its profit, too.

The UK gets stuffed by Blair again. We couldn't have seen that one coming.

Elgesh']That's our money he's giving away, and what did he buy with it? Sod all!
a) Didn't he win elections recently? :p
b) He bought two things:
- Eastern Europe will get the money it deserves...other new members from Western Europe got the same when they were new.
- France will now be in a much weaker position when it comes to the Agricultural Talks in 08/09. But much can happen until then.

a) Didn't he win elections recently? :p

No. He only won just over 30% of the vote, although he was strill able to form a government. Could be worse, though. We could have had Howard.

b) He bought two things:
- Eastern Europe will get the money it deserves...other new members from Western Europe got the same when they were new.

Poorer members do diserve money from the EU. France doesn't. Britain doesn't. Britain gives up 7 billion to pay for it. What do the french give up? Next to nothing. Considering that the European court of Auditors has never signed the EU budget as free from corruption, as a Brit i've no reason to believe that'll get any.

It's not the fault of Chirac or Eastern Europe that we got into this mess - it's our Government's fault by allowing an Econoimic Union to become a political one.

- France will now be in a much weaker position when it comes to the Agricultural Talks in 08/09. But much can happen until then.

Ha! Considering that the new countries already want Britain to pay more, and France's recent performance over EU Budget Talks, why should we believe that France will want to give up anything?

I'm very happy to be in a European Union - or even a Federal European State - but not one as corrupt, undemocratic and centralised as the one we have now.

No. He only won just over 30% of the vote, although he was strill able to form a government. Could be worse, though. We could have had Howard.
That is true.

Poorer members do diserve money from the EU. France doesn't. Britain doesn't. Britain gives up 7 billion to pay for it. What do the french give up? Next to nothing. Considering that the European court of Auditors has never signed the EU budget as free from corruption, as a Brit i've no reason to believe that'll get any.
Well, the French do actually pay a lot too...it's just that they have a lot of farmers, which receive a lot of money. Not that I think they should.
Maybe it would be good if we introduced some sort of Europe Tax, which eliminates the need for much of this constant bickering. It would be taken directly rather than indirectly from the population, such that it's not always about "We don't wanna pay this much!".
Nonetheless, this is better than nothing. BBC says the budget looks like this:
Overall spending: 862.36bn
UK rebate down 10.5bn from a total of 50-55bn
Aid to EU newcomers: 157bn (5.3bn more than the UK at first proposed)
Farm and rural development aid: 292bn
Justice and interior affairs: 10.2 bn
Foreign and humanitarian aid: 50bn
Administrative costs: 50.3bn
I reckon you can drop the agricultural money, and admin costs of 50b Euros are a bit ridiculous. Then you could spend almost 350b Euros on things like R&D and Foreign Aid, and turn the whole EU into a sort of Ireland.

It's not the fault of Chirac or Eastern Europe that we got into this mess - it's our Government's fault by allowing an Econoimic Union to become a political one.
It'll work itself out one way or another. I think a European Superstate is a good idea, but not one you can force. It'll happen with time once the need will become obvious.
But Germans don't really have a sense of patriotism or the like, such that if they are proud of being anything, it's most likely going to be being an European.

Ha! Considering that the new countries already want Britain to pay more, and France's recent performance over EU Budget Talks, why should we believe that France will want to give up anything?
They'll be more and more isolated. Britain gave up some, Germany gave up some - and Merkel has made it pretty clear that she won't be supporting France in everything like Schröder did.
Add to that that Chirac will be gone by then, and I wouldn't rule anything out.

I'm very happy to be in a European Union - or even a Federal European State - but not one as corrupt, undemocratic and centralised as the one we have now.
It's got its good aspects and its bad aspects. I'd think the Constitution would have done a lot of good to address current shortfalls. But unfortunately the politicians didn't communicate very well with the population, and the result was obvious.

It's got its good aspects and its bad aspects. I'd think the Constitution would have done a lot of good to address current shortfalls. But unfortunately the politicians didn't communicate very well with the population, and the result was obvious.

Yeah, I agree. Whatever, did you read it? Did somebody? It dedicated just one page to civil rights & liberties while occupied 2 chapters with economical issues. Too bad, elitist and interested to be approved.

I think this is what could be achieved under the circumstances.

Truth is, current EU leadership needs to be replaced.. Merkel is one of the few "new faces", but Blair and Chirac, and Berlusconni got to go. This agreement doesnt give substance to any concrete strategy that will attack Europe's problems, and it definitely does not attack the CAP problem, at least for now.

Lets hope that in the future they slash those funds for more R&D and defence ~.~

If you've got time...here is a rundown of the entire proposed EU constitution on the web.
http://europa.eu.int/scadplus/constitution/index_en.htm

I must tell you that I didn't read it in detail (I'm not really into law that much...), but I did skim through all sections and got the general idea. Particularly the changes to the decisionmaking process could've been useful. :(

If you've got time...here is a rundown of the entire proposed EU constitution on the web.
http://europa.eu.int/scadplus/constitution/index_en.htm

I must tell you that I didn't read it in detail (I'm not really into law that much...), but I did skim through all sections and got the general idea. Particularly the changes to the decisionmaking process could've been useful. :(

Yes, but don't call it a "constitution" or anything else that envolves said word.

It irks people. Well, even if the "wordthatcantbesaid" treaty isnt approved, they should at least try to make a simplified treaty with the changes to the decision making process.

I mean, it's kinda unfair that Blair will be the only one to burn at the stake :cool: