Richard Drax
Main Page: Richard Drax (Conservative - South Dorset)Department Debates - View all Richard Drax's debates with the HM Treasury
(14Â years, 10Â months ago)
Commons ChamberWhat a pleasure it is to follow the right hon. Member for Belfast North (Mr Dodds). It is an honour, indeed, and I entirely agree with everything he said.
It is encouraging to hear our Front-Bench team mention words such as âresolveââa word that seems to have disappeared from the English dictionary for a while. I wish they would follow up their words with action. What further evidence do weâthe Government, the country, the worldâneed to see to show that this whole federalist nightmare is not working? It is undemocratic and corrupt.
I have people in my constituency who are trying to borrow ÂŁ10,000, ÂŁ20,000 or ÂŁ30,000 to keep their businesses and jobs going. They simply cannot get it. Yet we are prepared to give Greeceâand, I suspect, Italyâbillions and billions of euros to a cause that is lost. It is quite beyond me, quite beyond my constituents and quite beyond most people in this country.
Both motions being debated today will, in their own ways, grant further powers and resources to the EU âdespite our best intentions. We have heard that the Government have succeeded in reducing the annual budget increase from 2011 from 6% or thereabouts to 2.9%. I welcome that. Like my hon. Friend the Member for Stone (Mr Cash), I hope that it will remain at that level.
As to the multi-annual financial framework, these words are marvellous, are they not? The MFFâa slip of the tongue could get one into all kinds of troubleânow commands our attention. I am relieved that the European Scrutiny Committee has recommended that these documents are seen in this House. Only here can such decisions be taken. The absence of precise details about the Commissionâs proposal is concerning, and I note that because of that absence, the European Scrutiny Committee has suggested that we focus on the Commissionâs expenditure ambitions and revenue proposals.
The Government estimate that the overall MFF budget represents an average increase of ÂŁ13.5 billion a year over the period. The UK contribution to the MFF between 2014 and 2020 is provisionally estimated to be 14.5% pre-rebate and 11.5% post-rebate. I agree with the Government that such extravagance is completely unacceptable, particularly when the level of public debt in member states will be 50% more than it was in 2007. The Commission argues that much of the increased expenditure is already committed to EU-wide projects, and suggests that there will be no increases in administration costs. That is hard to believe, given that the Government identified ÂŁ1.1 billion of administration costs in this yearâs budget alone. I am glad to hear that there is no possibility of the UKâs agreeing to the level of expenditure contained in these documents.
The revenue proposals are equally serious. For obvious reasons, the EUâs ultimate aim is to finance the budget entirely from so-called âown resourcesââwhich are, of course, nothing of the sort, and will become so only after the EU has levied a series of new duties, taxes and tariffs on member countries for its own benefit. The documents suggest a financial transaction tax, a financial activities tax, the auctioning of revenue from the EU emissions trading scheme, an air transport tax, a new VAT, an energy tax, and an EU corporate income tax. That is utter madness. It is for us in this House to decide issues of national sovereignty. The European Commission deludes itself in stating that such measures do not affect our right to rule ourselves. Document 12478/11 states:
âIt should also be stressed the proposals for new âown resourceâ have no impact on national sovereignty.â
I strenuously disagree.
Finally, there is the question of the rebate. Perhaps most important is the suggestion that the current financing system must
âsimplify the existing correction mechanismsâ.
In plain English, that means the UK rebate, which is now in the Commissionâs sights. Our relative prosperity is held against us, as is the open-ended nature of the rebate, but without it our net contribution to the EU as a percentage of national income would be twice as large as Franceâs contribution and 50% larger than that of Germany.
In these dying seconds, I urge the Government please, please to begin to stand up for our country and our future.