UK Liable to Pay off Greek Debts

[Old Timer]

As if things are not bad enough :roll::roll::roll:

The Government has finally confirmed that Britain could be liable to pay nearly £8bn of Greece's debts.
The news came in the House of Lords when the coalition was forced to answer a question asked by UKIP leader Lord Pearson, and showed how European Finance Ministers bent the rules about financial aid in order to prop-up the failing Eurozone economy.

When Lord Pearson asked if the UK could be forced to pay billions of pounds towards other EU countries' debts, Lord De Mauley (on behalf of the government replied: "Finance ministers agreed up to €60billion of emergency finance. Where there are defaults on loan payments... member states would be liable for a share. The UK's share would be approximately 13.6%, or up to a maximum of around €8 billion.
The EU are using a little known paragraph (article 122.2) of the Treaty of the Functioning European Union to enable the bailout.

Lord Pearson challenged the government on the legality of using the treaty in such a way stating: "This article can only be used legally to help with natural disasters, such as earthquakes and so on."
Avoiding the question, the government's spokesman stopped referring to the package as ‘emergency finance' and changed it to ‘loan', seemingly admitting to UKIP that the treaty could not be used to ‘give' money to countries in this circumstances he said: "That does not rule out member states lending each other money."

After the Lord's questions, a UKIP spokesman said: "It's all very well the government saying it is just a loan, but the EU have taken so many steps in committing Britain to pay-up should a country default on the loan, that we can't help wondering if the EU finance ministers are really expecting a single cent of it to be paid back.

"At the moment Greece has no money, they wouldn't be able to pay anyone back the price of a cup-of-tea, let alone €60billion. It looks like we are going to have to make even more cuts to our public services, so we can pay some of Greece's debts for them."

 

[Greenback]

We should carry on spending like the Greeks did until the Germans and the French bail us out! lol!

 

[Donny Dave]

I thought that's what Labour were trying to achieve ....

 

[CarterUSM]

Does this apply across the board? That is to say, net RECIEVERS from the EU also put their hand in their pocket ?

 

[GB]

Amazing! Our economy is a few steps away from being totally crippled to the extent that there is going to be major cuts (and no doubt job losses) in a whole range of areas and we are expected to give away almost £8bn?!? Loan or not, that is rediculous and maybe we should re think just what a benifit being in the EU is.

 

[Old Timer]

Dont forget our liability to provide for EU-wide Pensions as well.

The EU have directed that there should be Pension provision in all EU member States.

Typically the southern European Countries have inadequate arrangements. In consequence it will be a requirement that the "richer" northern European States contribute towards the increased costs. Similar liabilities will accrue for the fomer Soviet Union Countries,

Bottom line is that our financial liability to the EU will only increase substantially in due course.

What the pro-Europeans will not tell you is that, the nett cost of the UKs membership is actually negative, i. e. our costs are in excess of any benefit gained.

Arguments about jobs moving to the EU are nullified by the fact that this has happened / is already happening as EU Companies which now own much of our Industry move production back to their own Countries.

 

[thefab444]

This is part of the problem of expanding the Eurozone to be far too big and to encompass countries that aren't entirely suitable. Whilst I think British membership would in theory be a good idea, it would also be a good idea to kick out a lot of the Eastern European countries from the Euro.

 

[Greenback]

This is part of the problem of expanding the Eurozone to be far too big and to encompass countries that aren't entirely suitable. Whilst I think British membership would in theory be a good idea, it would also be a good idea to kick out a lot of the Eastern European countries from the Euro.

I have come to the conclusion that a European UNION between such a large numbe rof disparate states, cultures and economies is impossible. In fact, it is a disaster waiting to happen, and it may be happening now.

It was a big mistake to expand the EU to include so many Eastern European countries, although I believe this was done with the best of intentions.

The best thing that can be done now is to scrap the whole thing and start again, but I doubt that's even possible!

 

[thefab444]

I agree in theory, a Western European Union would be much more appropriate in terms of migration and finanical integration, although a free trade zone covering the whole of the current EU would be desirable.

the nett cost of the UKs membership is actually negative, i. e. our costs are in excess of any benefit gained

Figures? I know UKIP wheel out that argument every election but I've never seen conclusive financial proof.

 

[Nick W]

I see absolutely no problem with paying money towards bailing out Greece. The money would be obtained from UK Government bonds, and not at the expense of job losses or public service cuts. There are many reasons to support this action:

1. Social benefits - Greece is a European trading partner, and so aiding the greek economy benefits our own economy and the economy of the rest of the world by keeping production levels at long-term sustainable levels.
2. Moral benefits - In the same situation, we would wish to be bailed out by our partners.
3. International relations - By assisting with the bail-out of Greece, greater co-operation can be achieved in the future.

As for the ridiculous views of the UKIP spokesman, does anyone really believe that "Greece has no money"? Shame on him for trying to win favour through deceit.

 

[devon_metro]

Shame on him for trying to win favour through deceit.

That sounds like a socialist policy

 

[Donny Dave]

Unlike Nick, I do see a problem with us helping to pay off debts that Greece have accrued.

Let's face it, it isn't just 1 or 2 countries that have suffered through the global recession, it's every country in the world. Now the UK has to go through some painful cuts to get ourselves back to a sound finacial footing, and that has started already with cuts of £6 billion announced. The new government is planning an emergency budget in the next couple of weeks, no doubt, this will announce some major cuts across the board. A lot of this is down to Labour spending money they didn't have in the first place.

Every country in the world is feeling the effects of the recession, so why should Every country in the EU cut their spending because they don't have enough money, simply to give it to another that can't or wont cut their own spending?

 

[ladydsm]

let Greece sort its own problems out .you would not have a drivers union at each depot so if one over spends on holidays fast cars to much drink big house you could all chip in and help out.
charity begins at home I LOOK AFTER MYSELF I dont chip in to help the street out.

 

[thefab444]

charity begins at home I LOOK AFTER MYSELF I dont chip in to help the street out.

Well when you need aid, don't expect your street to help you out.

so why should Every country in the EU cut their spending because they don't have enough money, simply to give it to another that can't or wont cut their own spending?

I think you'll find Greece are having to adopt some very strict, and unpopular, austerity measures in order to get the EU bail out; they're not just giving money away.

 

[devon_metro]

let Greece sort its own problems out .you would not have a drivers union at each depot so if one over spends on holidays fast cars to much drink big house you could all chip in and help out.
charity begins at home I LOOK AFTER MYSELF I dont chip in to help the street out.

Indeed, i've never understood why despite the massive financial problems in this country, the government still chooses to spend £ millions in foreign aid. Perhaps if we have more money in our pockets we might all do our bit.

 

[thefab444]

It depends where the foreign aid goes to. Some of it is quite legitimate in my opinion, for example, if we are not going to pull out of Afghanistan (which seems to be the case), we're going to need to spend money rebuilding. But I was rather shocked to see that some of the foreign aid budget goes to Russia, India and China. Given that the latter two are enjoying levels of growth we can only dream of at the moment (6% and 9%), and are up-and-coming developing industrial and technological nations, it seems rather odd that we are giving them aid money! We need to focus on growth in our own backyard (Europe), and put that before more international aims. Isolationism in a multi-national form.

 

[Old Timer]

Figures? I know UKIP wheel out that argument every election but I've never seen conclusive financial proof.

The European Union costs us £65 billion gross every year.
That's about £1,000 each every year for every man, woman and child in the UK. And it increases every year.

Estimates of the true cost of the EU are difficult to come by. MPs have called many times for a cost-benefit analysis, to prove or disprove the benefits of membership. Successive Governments, both Labour and Conservative, have refused, on the grounds that the "benefits" are self-evident. In truth they are afraid of what such a study would show. The Bruges Group have finally produced an authoritative study.
(http://www.brugesgroup.com/CostOfTheEU2008.pdf)

The total gross cost to the UK of EU membership in 2008 they estimate at around £65,000,000,000* - including:

• £28 billion for business to comply with EU regulations,
• £17 billion of additional food costs resulting from the Common Agricultural Policy
• £3.3 billion - the value of the catch lost when the Common Fisheries Policy let other countries fish in our territorial waters
• £14.6 billion gross paid into the EU budget and other EU funds.

The total budget for EU 'administration' alone is £34 billion. The European Commission claims on its website to employ 25,000 staff. The true figure, according to an Open Europe study in August 2008, is 170,000.

Nearly 10,000 of these receive over £54,000 pa - over twice as many as in the whole of Whitehall.

Britain's EU Commissioner, Baroness Ashton, will get £750,000 for just one year's service - including £200,000 in salary, £250,000 in "transitional payments" on leaving her post, and a raft of perks. She will also get an annual pension of £8,000 pa for one years service - twice what a UK pensioner gets for a lifetime of work.

A Swiss Government cost/benefit analysis of full European Union membership ("Europe 2006" June 2006) concluded that membership would cost between six and nine times the cost of their present bilateral agreements with EU countries. The UK Government has never carried out an official cost benefit analysis of our membership. A paper by Ruth Lea, Director of Global Vision, showed that, based on recent estimates, the UK's contributions to the EU budget are set to double in coming years.

During the last decade (1997-2006), Britain's gross contributions to the EU Budget averaged £10½bn a year whilst the net contributions averaged £3¼bn. For the current 7-year EU financing period (2007-13) these figures are expected to rise significantly. Gross contributions are forecast to run at more than £14bn (in 2004 prices) whilst average net contributions will be over £5½bn.
Reflecting a smaller rebate and weaker receipts in the final 3 years of this financing period, Britain's net contributions are expected to average almost £6½ bn for the years 2011-2013 - double the average of the decade from 1997 to 2006. Much of this money will be swallowed up by EU corruption and waste.

The author commented, "British net contributions to the EU are rising and will average £6½ bn by the beginning of the next decade. These funds could be far better spent on either cutting people's taxes, improving Britain's health, education and transport facilities or increasing Britain's aid budget to the poorest countries across the globe."

The costs of the EU weigh especially heavily on the UK poor, who spend a higher proportion of their incomes on:

• Food: It is estimated that the Common Agricultural Policy costs the average British household £322 pa. EU Budget Commissioner Dalia Grybauskaite has said that the CAP forces consumers to pay "two or three times more for food than we would pay without this policy (source: Telegraph, 25 November; Irish Times 13 November)
• Imported clothes, whose prices are artificially higher because of EU trade policies, designed to protect their inefficient and high cost producers. Genuinely free trade, outside the EU, would reduce the prices we pay for imported goods.
• Taxes. A large chunk of our taxes go into the EU budget. When we leave the EU, we will be able to use that money to reduce our tax burden.

 

[Greenback]

It depends where the foreign aid goes to. Some of it is quite legitimate in my opinion, for example, if we are not going to pull out of Afghanistan (which seems to be the case), we're going to need to spend money rebuilding. But I was rather shocked to see that some of the foreign aid budget goes to Russia, India and China. Given that the latter two are enjoying levels of growth we can only dream of at the moment (6% and 9%), and are up-and-coming developing industrial and technological nations, it seems rather odd that we are giving them aid money! We need to focus on growth in our own backyard (Europe), and put that before more international aims. Isolationism in a multi-national form.

Aside from the Afghanistan bit, I couldn't agree more!

 

[thefab444]

Well we can't just trash the place and not spend any money rebuilding it. As far as I'm concerned we should never have gone in in the first place (likewise with Iraq), but unless we fully retreat, we're going to have to spend money to rebuild the country.

 

[Greenback]

We should not have gone in just becaus ethe Yanks were upset! With both Iraq and Afghanistan, little effort was made to think about how to win the peace. Even after Vietnam, the Americans seem to believe that their military hardware is enough to solve any problem that might arise.

Personally, I would pull out completely!

 

[ladydsm]

I agree with green back pull out think of the money we would save.
our army should be here to protect us even if used as guards to keep illegals under lock and key until they can be deported back.

 

[Oswyntail]

.... The Bruges Group have finally produced an authoritative study.
(http://www.brugesgroup.com/CostOfTheEU2008.pdf)....

Interesting - but the Bruges Group are fanatical Eurosceptics, and their figures are about as unbiased and "authoritative" as the RAC foundation when writing about railways. IMHO, there have been no objective studies done yet - and probably cannot be because, in such a large sphere of operations, both "cost" and "benefit" are impossible to quantify. (eg - how do you quantify the cost or benefit of relaxed internal borders? Or being able to work easily in the Netherlands?)

 

[Trog]

.... "cost" and "benefit" are impossible to quantify. (eg - how do you quantify the cost or benefit of relaxed internal borders? Or being able to work easily in the Netherlands?)

As I don't have a passport probably £0 for me.

 

[Old Timer]

Dont misunderstand me.

There are some very good reasons why an EU could be beneficial. I amongst many others believe however that Political and Economic Union is neither necessary or desirable.

The PIGS scenario is a particularly apt example, as no two Countries have exactly the same economic situation, yet the impact of Economic Union spreads the misery even to those Countries which have no particular problems.

The EU always claimed that economic union would have no downside, yet in search of a dream, they bent the rules for entry and are now to reap the rewards. Already there are rumblings within Germany that threaten the Euro.

There is much in the EU itself which only favours the oligarchy of unelected officials who have enormous power even beyond that of the EU "Parliament".

For those who value their freedom, they may wish to look at how the European Arrest Warrant (EAW) is operating. It allows a person to be removed to another Country which in many cases would not have legal safeguards to the same extent, and for matters that may not even be illegal here. The UK legal establishment is seriously worried about this, yet we are unable to do anything about it.

There are currently a couple of cases, mostly involving the Mediteranean Countries, where UK citizens have been subject to the EAW on the flimsiest of evidence and hearsay.

As far as the Bruges Group is concerned are you suggesting their figures are inaccurate or falsified ?

 

[Snapper]

The Bruges group are a bunch of right-wing nutters, They also like to deny climate change. They are hardly impartial. Luckily they are are about as influential as all the other right-wing nutters.

 

[Old Timer]

The Bruges group are a bunch of right-wing nutters, They also like to deny climate change. They are hardly impartial. Luckily they are are about as influential as all the other right-wing nutters.

Ah yes, not holding a Left Wing view is such a crime isn't it.

So tell me Snapper, how does your Left Wing conscience sit with the persecution of those who have tried to make public EU corruption ?

Does it worry you that the EU has sacked, terrorised, arrested and criminalised such people, who incidentally it also brands as mentally ill ?

Sounds familiar ?

 

[Oswyntail]

......As far as the Bruges Group is concerned are you suggesting their figures are inaccurate or falsified ?

I am suggesting that their figures are selective, and interpreted selectively. Just as are those presented by parties who are pro-European. The problem with all this is that what started life as a fairly simple, economic entity, has grown without any real overall plan - much of that plan was, and still is, impossible because no one is willing or able to plan from a position above the various nation states (The only way that could be done would, IMHO, be by dictatorial enforcement - a BAD thing!). So, rather than limit the project to those things that can be agreed to be universally beneficial, other bits have been bolted on that cause friction.
I believe that getting out of Europe completely would be crippling to the UK, and it is worth the cost of some of the unrealistic schemes to get the benefits. And we should be working vigorously within the system to change it for the better.

 

[Snapper]

Ah yes, not holding a Left Wing view is such a crime isn't it.

So tell me Snapper, how does your Left Wing conscience sit with the persecution of those who have tried to make public EU corruption ?

Does it worry you that the EU has sacked, terrorised, arrested and criminalised such people, who incidentally it also brands as mentally ill ?

Sounds familiar ?

Stop trying to change the subject. The Bruges group have little credibility outside their own circle. They are anything but impartial and they present dodgy assertions with no evidence or quoted research to back them up. Most people can see through that.

 

[Old Timer]

Stop trying to change the subject. The Bruges group have little credibility outside their own circle. They are anything but impartial and they present dodgy assertions with no evidence or quoted research to back them up. Most people can see through that.

:roll: :roll:

Obviously you cannot read, as just on the first few pages there are clear references to the sources of information.

As I said previously, and I re-iterate again, anything which opposes your own partoicular Left view point is by virtue of that fact wrong and is villified. This is the text book response.

This despite the fact that half your own Political kind now thing the EU is not worth it.

I really have stopped debating with you (as have pretty much all of the people on here I suspect) because you simply will not recognise any counter-argument or point that does not fit into your own narrow view. You very rarely introduce anything positive to a topic but merely condemn and dispute, and make barbed comments against anything that is not Left of the Guardian.

I gave some very sound reasons WHY the UK would be better off out of the EU in a unified economic and political sense, with examples.

Your response as usual is to ignore anything that might just tip those rose-tinted spectacles and suggest that Socialism is anything but perfect.

They must really love you to bits. You are so unchallenging it is unhealthy.

It is amazing how after 13 years of Labour rule, the same Ex-Ministers who were telling us how wonderful things were and how good Labour were, have suddenly got out the hair suits and are publicly telling anyone who can be bothered to listen to the losers that in actual fact everything was far from OK and they had been saying this behind closed doors all along.

Dear God even your own members of the House of Lords have started it. :roll:

A little reflection on your part in the state the UK is now in would be a useful gesture I rather think.

I do not expect or want a response to this post.

 

[ladydsm]

In the news recently they say that spain is heading the same way as Greece
so how come the spanish bank santander could afford to buy the abbey and alliance and leicester and now they are looking at 200 RBS high street banks
Do we want our hard earned wages going to spain .
also what about al the eastern europeans sending money back home we will not have any money left soon as no one is buying from us.