FURY AT 24 WEEKS HOLIDAY FOR EU'S PAMPERED STAFF

Lady Ashton has come under attack for EU excess

Thursday March 29,2012

By Martyn Brown

 Have your say(7)

UNDER-FIRE Brussels chief Baroness Ashton sparked fresh outrage yesterday after it emerged her army of foreign diplomats are entitled to an amazing 24 weeks holiday a year.

The officials who boost the EU’s profile around the world in far-flung destinations like Fiji get a minimum of 83 days annual leave – four times the holiday allowance enjoyed by most British workers.

On top of that, additional “special leave” entitlements mean that diplomats working in 30 delegations in the Far East, Asia and Africa can leave their desks unfilled for between 21 to 24 weeks, up to half the working year.

The generous holiday and flexitime arrangements are also topped up with two weeks off for “professional training in Brussels” to add to the basic 19 weeks leave.

The extraordinary holiday entitle- ments come with other lavish pay and perks including salaries of up to £188,000 as well as bumper expenses for chauffeurs, homes and children.

The package for EEAS staff serving overseas is very generous, as it is for all staff working in the Brussels institutions

British diplomat

They add further weight to the Daily Express crusade to get Britain out of the EU and wrestle back power from the organisation.

The Daily Express revealed last year how Lady Ashton’s European Exter- nal Action Service delegation in Fiji alone cost £2.6million in 2011.

The service costs £400million a year to run in total, of which £54million is from British taxpayers, proving that the EU juggernaut of excess shows no sign of slowing despite the financial crisis crippling European economies.

The details, which come as pressure mounts on the European Commission to overhaul Brussels’ staffing regula- tions, was met with fury.

Robert Oxley, campaign manager of the TaxPayers’ Alliance said: “It’s sickening to see overpaid EU flunkies working for a pointless Brussels bureaucracy enjoying frankly excessive amounts of time off. While hard-pressed British taxpayers tighten their own belts they’re paying for European diplomats to spend an unheard of amount of time on holiday.”

Baroness Ashton, the world’s highest paid female politician earning £230,000 a year, was plucked from obscurity by former PM Gordon Brown to be Europe’s first “foreign minister”.

She has been criticised for squandering vast sums of taxpayers’ cash on an army of pen-pushers around the world.

She created the European External Action Service at the beginning of 2010 but has sparked anger for demanding a budget rise of almost six per cent and has been accused of failing to provide leadership on the world stage in a string of crises.

The EU has separate representation even in Vanuatu, the Solomon Islands and Papua New Guinea.

Diplomats in Barbados also cover other Caribbean nations such as the British Virgin Islands and St Lucia.

Their main tasks are to manage aid programmes and handle trade issues, largely concerned with bananas.

One British diplomat said yesterday: “The package for EEAS staff serving overseas is very generous, as it is for all staff working in the Brussels institutions. Cuts need to be made.”

Not Happy with Royal Mail's price increases? Guess who's to blame?

  With Royal Mail's prices set to sky rocket at the end of April, I find myself wondering how our once great postal service has mutated into a soulless business run by penny pinching accountants.



  It all started with the loss of their monopoly, the focus shifted dramatically from quality of service to quality of profits, postal staff were cut to the bone along with their pensions. So why would any Government deliberately destroy a long standing public asset?

The answer is that the EU forced them to....


From http://www.caef.org.uk/d113rylml.html


1. A 1997 EU Press Release states an EU-wide postal service would be established. This was achieved by a series of EU Directives. This 'liberalised service' allows other companies to trade in Britain. 21 companies compete with Royal Mail and take 20% of the total business. They operate only in the profitable areas whilst Royal Mail is obliged by law to provide a six day a week delivery to all parts of the country at an equal price even if it is unprofitable. The effect of this unfair competition resulted in Royal Mail's profits falling by 86% to £22 million in 2006/2007. In the following year it lost £33 million.

2. The second factor is the Amsterdam Treaty which lays down that any state aid to a commercial organisation must be approved by the EU Commission. In 2001, the Government registered Royal Mail as a public limited company. The Government holds all the shares probably to avoid the EU's right to control the use of subsidies. Then, in order to overcome the loss of Royal Mail's profits, the Government subsidised Royal Mail without EU permission with the equivalent of €2.5 billion in order to introduce improved mechanical sorting equipment into the system. Some of Royal Mail's competitors complained to the European Commission which started an enquiry. In response the Government ordered a review of the postal services sector. The Review Panel submitted its report to Parliament last December. It describes Royal Mail as 'inefficient' but fails to acknowledge that it is the EU which prevents the introduction of modern systems. Instead the report suggests amalgamating Royal Mail with one or more private sector companies.

  The resent price hikes are an attempt by Royal Mail command to make the company look more appealing to potential buyers, as the one thing that makes it a 'toxic' purchase is the universal delivery service (one price goes anywhere in the UK). It would seem that the privatisation of Royal Mail is inevitable & with TNT being bought out by UPS recently, makes them the most likely candidate to run Royal Mail.

If privatisation does occur, Royal Mail will go exactly the same way as all of the utility companies that have been privatised, the net result, the customer paying exceptionally high prices for a poor service.

NOW EU BANS PLASTIC BAGS

EU bureaucrats sparked fury last night over a plan to ban plastic shopping bags in Britain

Monday March 26,2012

By Martyn Brown

 Have your say(8)

MEDDLING EU bureaucrats sparked fury last night over a plan to ban plastic shopping bags in Britain.

Brussels commissars want to outlaw shops from stocking them or impose a wallet-busting tax on shoppers to dramatically reduce their use.

The controversial measure, the latest in a long line of interfering legislation from the EU, is being driven by a so-called fight against pollution.

The European Commission will take the first step to a total ban next month by publishing a report on plastic packaging.

One of the key proposals will be a recommendation for mandatory charging for plastic shopping bags.

The proposals were met with fury last night by retailers and politicians and added to the growing support for our crusade to get Britain out of the EU.

it would alienate consumers and do little to boost the EU’s stuttering economic growth.

UKIP MEP Paul Nuttall

Writing in the Daily Express today, UKIP MEP Paul Nuttall said it would alienate consumers and do little to boost the EU’s stuttering economic growth.

“Whether anybody in Brussels has noticed or not, the economy, both here in the UK and across the continent, is hardly surging forward,” he says. “Millions have lost their jobs and millions have never had a job. Businesses are closing down and those lucky enough to be in work are having to tighten their belts as prices rise and salaries stagnate. So you would think that now would not be the time to introduce a new tax on commerce.”

Retail groups insisted any extra costs would be felt by shoppers.

Sarah Cordey, of the British Retail Consortium, said: “Enforcing a charge to use carrier bags hits consumers in the pocket, particularly during hard times. It also doesn’t take into account the good work in Britain to reduce bag consumption. It is wrong for the EU to put the emphasis on carrier bags in tackling pollution. It is proven that they have a minor effect on the environment when compared to other things such as the transporting of goods.”

If the EU goes down the route of charging for carrier bags instead of an outright ban, it would follow moves already taken by Ireland and Italy where levies have been introduced.

So far, most large retailers in Britain have relied on customers to reduce their usage voluntarily.

The average family uses 12 plastic carriers for the weekly food shop, while 46 per cent take home up to 10 from each visit. But a ban would require people to remember to take their own bags each time they go shopping. Unplanned trips would be almost wiped out if they were unavailable to buy.

Last year, Britain’s large retailers handed out 6.4 billion carrier bags, 333 million more than the previous year.

Most are used just once and end up in landfill sites where they can take between 100 and 1,000 years to rot.

In 2008 there were 3.4 million tons of plastic bags produced in Europe and only 6 per cent were recycled, the Commission claims.

European environment commissioner Janez Potocnik said: “Fifty years ago, the single-use plastic bag was almost unheard of. Now we use them for a few minutes and they pollute our environment for decades.

“But social attitudes are evolving and there is a widespread desire for change.” In 2008, Marks & Spencer became the first big high street chain to make customers pay for carrier bags. Within a few months of imposing a 5p charge, the company saw an 80 per cent fall to a level that has since been maintained.

Last October, Wales imposed a 5p charge and shops that provide free bags face a fine of up to £5,000.

However, big retailers are reluctant to impose a charge. Sainsbury’s tried but it quickly provoked an uproar and it now says free bags are “critical” to its customers. Boots has also ruled out removing them from its stores.

But some experts question their environmental impact. According to packaging pressure group Wrap, they make up less than 1 per cent of home waste.

PENSIONERS RAIDED TO PAY EU BILLIONS

Thursday, 22nd March 2012

As around 4.4million pensioners are hit with the removal of a valuable tax break that will cost them around £3.5billion, it has been revealed that the amount of money given to the European Union has increased by £1.8billion since last November.

Budget papers reveal the difference between Britain's real and forecast net contribution from 2010/11 to 2013/14 increased from £31.3billion at the Autumn statement to £33.1billion at the Budget.

The figures not only show that the Treasury got their estimates wrong, but also that the UK is paying more to the EU than ever before.

Forecasts also released yesterday by the Office for Budget Responsibility, the Government's fiscal watchdog, reveal that in 2012 the Eurozone will have a recession, while in every one of the next four years it will deliver output growth at less than half the rate of the world as a whole.

These figures show that by being a member of the EU, the UK's economy is chained to the slowcoach of the world economy.

UKIP Leader Nigel Farage, said: "It is disgraceful that many of the country's pensioners will lose out due to these tax changes, yet the amount of money we give to the EU continues to spiral out of control.

"The Government has got its priorities wrong and these figures speak for themselves."

WHY ANOTHER TORY EU REBELLION IS NOW ON THE CARDS

George Osborne May back another euro bailoutt

Friday March 16,2012

By Stewart Jackson

 Have your say(2)

THE European political elite is in denial.

Fixated with deeper political integration it will not face up to the reality that Europe cannot escape a debt crisis by either borrowing or printing more money and that the EU is chronically uncompetitive.

Its leaders alone fail to see that the euro (and perhaps even the EU itself) is in a death spiral. The indebtedness of Europe is eye-watering. 

In the next three years Italy and Spain need to refinance one trillion euros worth of debt. Youth unemployment has reached 50 per cent in Spain and 40 per cent in Greece and the eurozone economy shrank 0.3 per cent in the last quarter of 2011.


David Cameron at the European Council


David Cameron was right to veto a new EU treaty in December and is right to focus energies on cutting red tape and boosting jobs and growth to get Europe moving again but the truth is such initiatives are unlikely to influence the two major players on the continent: France and Germany. The French establishment abhors the idea of an “Anglo-Saxon” regime of tax cuts, deregulation and a free enterprise policy. 

Germany’s political class is complicit in this catastrophe, which may lead to widespread civil disorder across Europe. 

That is not just because of the imposition through a pro-EU puppet government in Greece of brutal economic punishment but because they were aware that Greece never came close to meeting the entry criteria for joining the euro a dozen years ago. 

Its people are being sacrificed on the altar of a failed European utopian experiment. The project of keeping the sickly currency alive is impoverishing much of southern Europe and inflicting destitution, in particular on the Greeks who are prevented from even devaluing their currency, which historically would have rescued a country from such despair. 

The euro has always been a political project. It was economic madness to force disparate economies into a fiscal union without true convergence. The Germans compound this dismal situation by refusing to allow the European Central Bank to become the “lender of last resort”.

Germany’s own central bank the Bundesbank holds £180billion of currency reserves and could do much more to underpin the euro’s survival but refuses to do so.

That is why EU leaders are now looking for a “big bazooka” or firewall via the International Monetary Fund and its 187 member countries, perhaps of up to $500billion, to help rescue the euro. 

This is despite the fact that the United States and Canada have refused to assist and China has imposed impossible conditions.

Conservative MPs, many of whom wish to see the demise of the euro, an orderly Greek default and do not want to see UK taxpayers’ money wasted on a lost cause, were heartened  by the robust message from Chancellor George Osborne before Christmas: that the UK would not be part of a form of state-sponsored money laundering via the IMF to bail out a currency of which we are not a part and will never join.


David Cameron speaks to European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso



The IMF after all largely exists to help poorer countries in the Third World, not relatively wealthy currency unions such as the EU. 

Greece is no longer in any case a sovereign nation but effectively a supplicant region of a larger political entity called the eurozone. 

Why should our taxes fund her debts via another “sticking plaster” solution? Now the rhetoric is changing. The Chancellor has unequivocally backed the survival of the euro and maintained that this is in the UK’s interest, come what may. 

We are told we might now assist financially “if others do more”. We are witnessing a softening- up exercise by influential political figures in order to persuade backbenchers that this is “inevitable” and “in Britain’s interests”.

Arch europhile Lord Mandelson is applying subtle pressure upon the Labour Party leadership, which for once did the right thing by opposing a previous IMF bailout last summer.

Conservative backbencher Andrew Tyrie, chairman of the Treasury Select Committee, penned a supportive article in the Wall Street Journal a few weeks ago advocating a UK contribution to an IMF bailout, which was “helpfully” circulated to MPs by Tory Whips.

With Britain still on the cusp of recession George Osborne will have to make some tough decisions when he presents his Budget next week and he’s under intense pressure to boost growth, cut taxes for families, reduce regulations for businesses and plot a road map towards recovery.

For many backbenchers any hint of a commitment to prop up the euro with their constituents’ cash will be incendiary and make the 81-strong EU referendum rebellion last year seem like a minor Parliamentary spat.

In April Mr Osborne will travel to an IMF meeting in Washington. He will come under greater pressure then to commit a large slice of UK taxpayers’ cash – perhaps up to £17billion – to the eurozone via the IMF. 

A vote this spring in the Commons, which would be needed to rubber stamp such a decision, could see a Government defeat – if not a rout.

For the sake of our public finances and the unity of both the Conservative Party and the coalition Mr Osborne would be wise to leave his chequebook in 11 Downing Street.

The author is MP for Peterborough and a member of the Commons Public Accounts Committee. He resigned as a ministerial aide last year to campaign for an EU referendum. 

EVEN THE FRENCH THINK THE EU IS A WASTE OF MONEY

The poll findings reveal simmering ­tensions across all member states.

Sunday March 18,2012

By Kirsty Buchanan

 Have your say(9)

MORE than half of French people have branded the European Union a waste of money. Some 43 per cent of Germans feel the same way, compared with 39 per cent of Britons.

The poll findings reveal simmering ­tensions across all member states as the eurozone crisis takes its toll on taxpayers.

Bailouts for debt-laden countries and a Europe-wide squeeze on public spending are casting doubt over the cost of the whole EU integration project.

Nigel Farage, leader of the UK Independence Party, said: “The high-handed actions of the European elite are succeeding in turning the entire Continent against them.

“No longer are the British people alone in condemning the project. While taxpayers across the Continent have a greater belief in the dream, even they are beginning to have qualms about the practical costs of that dream in these times of ­austerity.”

The poll, the most in-depth survey of its kind in recent years, was carried out by new think tank YouGov-Cambridge, which questioned more than 11,000 voters across the EU. It reveals that Britain and the eurozone countries are heading in “two starkly different directions”.

The high-handed actions of the European elite are succeeding in turning the entire Continent against them

Nigel Farage, leader of the UK Independence Party,

While the majority of voters in France, Germany and Italy favour more integration, support for the project in the UK drains away.

Six out of 10 Britons want a renegotiation of our relationship with Brussels or complete withdrawal. Six out of 10 also back a national referendum.

In contrast 62 per cent of Germans, 61 per cent of Italians and almost half of French voters want greater integration.

There is even a majority in Italy in favour of a United States of Europe, an idea also given the backing of four out of 10 French voters.

The vast majority of British voters want to reclaim national control in almost all policy areas.

Some 79 per cent want total sovereignty over immigration, 80 per cent want Westminster to wrest back control over all union and labour legislation and 74 per cent want agricultural policy restored to the UK. With the eurozone countries determined to press ahead with a financial transaction tax which would hit the City of London hard, some 68 per cent want Britain to be given back control over financial regulation.

The poll findings have been seized on by Tories who want the Prime Minister to use the eurozone crisis to re-open talks with Brussels over our relationship with the EU.

The Fresh Start group is mapping out ways for the UK to claw back power and wants a firm commitment to renegotiation backed by a referendum in the next Conservative manifesto.

Andrea Leadsom, co-founder of Fresh Start, said: “These poll findings make very interesting reading. There is no doubt that with the eurozone crisis there is an opportunity for wholesale renegotiation.

“It is a huge opportunity for Britain to create a new relationship with the EU based on a single market and the internal free movement of labour.”

The poll also reveals major faultlines opening up between Germany and other eurozone countries about how best to tackle the currency crisis.

It suggests German public opinion could eventually force a break-up of the eurozone by forcing out debt-laden countries such as Greece.

Most German taxpayers back Chancellor Angela Merkel’s refusal to allow a greater role for the European Central Bank in easing the currency crisis.

The poll also suggests German voters have run out of patience with bail-outs for countries not fully committed to harsh austerity measures. More than half of Germans think it’s wrong to spend taxpayers’ money trying to save the euro.

Nigel Farage - EU Carry On Up The Khyber

UK Independence Party (UKIP)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OW0C_SRbamg

Detremined but Delusional Eurocrats Carry On Up The Khyber - Nigel Farage

www.youtube.com

Donate to UKIP: http://www.ukip.org/donations |http://www.ukipmeps.org/ | http://twitter.com/#!/Nigel_Farage • European Parliament, Strasbourg, 13 

NEW EU RULES WRECK PENSIONS

Top British firm's shock warning to millions of workers

Thursday March 15,2012

By Andrew Johnson and Sarah O’Grady

 Have your say(6)

Pension savers are facing a double whammy of pain because of new European Union rules, one of Britain’s top insurers warned yesterday.

New “unisex” regulations will mean lower pensions for men while much- criticised solvency controls on how insurers invest money could push up pension costs for everyone, say experts.

They fear the proposals will cause the cost of saving to be so high and any future pension so low that millions of people will think it is not worth putting money aside for their retirement.

Legal & General has now branded as “an outrage” the rule which will remove the right of insurers to price annuities – the income bought with a pension-pot – by taking account of a customer’s sex.

While sex equality rules are forcing up car insurance for women despite them being safer drivers, they will push down the value of pension pots for men because they will be measured against women who typically live longer.

L&G director John Pollock said yesterday: “The gender directive is an outrage. It is bad for customers, because it is unfair and inappropriate to force unisex rates on people.”

The gender directive is an outrage

L&G director John Pollock

L&G chief executive Tim Breedon added: “Our group is very supportive of the right products for the right customers at the right prices in the right way. This is not the way to achieve that and the average customer will be worse off.”

The company said it would have to price at the higher rates demanded by the new policy because it could not predict in advance the mix of genders in its customer base.

Mr Pollock predicted there would be a sharp, short-term spike upwards before prices dipped, but costs would remain higher than current levels.

The second blow to hit pension savers comes from new solvency rules, called Solvency II, which could force pension funds to hold large cash buffers to guard against future risks.

Under the proposals, 6,400 UK companies with defined benefit or final salary schemes would be required to put in considerable sums to cut their deficits.

But experts warn this would cost billions of pounds, cause huge job losses and force the closure of the remaining generous final salary pension schemes.

Dr Ros Altmann, director-general of the over-50s campaign group Saga, was scathing in her criticism of EU rule makers. “There is a real danger that EU rules will further undermine the pensions of hard-working decent UK citizens,” she said.

“The crazy rules on ‘unisex’ annuity pricing will mean much lower pensions for all the men buying annuities in future, and the draconian Solvency II requirements will push pensions down even further, because insurers will be forced to hold more low-yielding Government bonds.

“By trying to foist rules on our pension system – which is very different from most other European countries – the EU could make UK pensioners much poorer than they should be. Their search for a ‘one-size-fits-all’ system does not suit the UK and will impoverish British pensioners. The Government must urgently represent these issues at the highest level before it’s too late.”

Mr Breedon described Solvency II as a “betrayal of savers”. He fears that its demands to make ultra-safe investments, which pay out less than those carrying more risk, will dent returns needed to underpin pension income.

L&G’s warnings follows protests from another major insurer, Prudential, which said on Tuesday that it might be forced to quit Britain in favour of a foreign HQ because of the solvency rules.

Prudential chief executive Tidjane Thiam warned Solvency II would hit investment in the economy by making insurers put money into “safe” government debt, rather than into corporate bonds to match their liabilities.

However, he was hopeful his worst fears would not come to pass as Continental insurers had woken up to the potential impact on their businesses.

However the European Commission said: “The financial crisis demonstrated only too clearly how important good risk management and sound governance are. This not the time for complacency in the financial sector.”

L&G yesterday reported a five per cent jump in underlying profits to £1billion and it raised the dividend payout by 35 per cent to 6.4p.