The EU presses for higher and more EU taxes

I was pleased to see in the latest Commission Paper on the future of EU Finances the EU has set out a number of options to pay for a more ambitious Union government. As they say, the level of political ambition must be aligned with the financial means to act. They look at both increasing the contributions from member states, and seeking new direct sources of tax revenue.If they just decide to carry on around the current level of commitment and integration they identify the need for more sources of revenue and the end to rebates. It is in line with many continental wishes for a full Union, and with what some of us predicted prior to the referendum. It is good the UK will not now be trying to stop them and will not be in line for paying.

They also state that “The withdrawal of the UK will signify the loss of an important partner and contributor to the financing of EU policies and programmes. However, it also presents an opportunity for a vital discussion about the modernisation of the EU budget” – as the Uk of course stood in the way of getting rid of rebates to own resource contributions.

They look forward to cancelling all rebates on contributions. They float the idea of directly acting common environmental and energy taxes. They look at taking a percentage of each country’s Corporation Tax and at a Financial Transactions Tax.

They consider auctions under the Emissions Trading System, emission premia for cars, and entry fees for travellers. They could tax electricity and motor fuel. They also expect to make more from seignorage on the Euro.

It will be interesting to see which of the five scenarios the EU signs up, ranging from doing less to doing much more together. It appears from the statements of Mrs Merkel and Mr Macron that the move will be towards doing more and towards greater political union. This will obviously entail accepting higher payments under the current system, allied to new sources of Union revenue from the list above.

Reflection Paper on the future of EU finances EU Commission June 28th 2017


  1. Newmania
    June 29, 2017

    Yeeesh with a tribe of little gnomes combing a mountain of EU output is this the best smear you can find ? I`d get back to blaming “foreigners” for high housing costs

    reply This is not a smear! Why don’t you want to talk about the Union you admire?

    1. Narrow Shoulders
      June 29, 2017

      @Nma How do you account for the effects of supply and demand in housing? Are you a people denier? How much of our land would you have tarmaced over to house the hoards arriving every month.

      Mr Redwood, we will end up paying the increased taxes for at least a “transitional” period.

      1. Hope
        June 29, 2017

        And so does the Tory Govt despite claiming only a few weeks ago it was a low tax party. Over 300 tax rises in seven years! Yesterday Lewin on TV saying the public wanted higher taxes! Has he, Grayling and others lost the plot? We want more waste cut out and better use of our money i.e. severely cut overseas aid. Westminster might think it is a good ruse we do not.No sense in May claiming we have a big economy, so what when she is borrowing the money to give away! Can she add up?

        If MPs get an undeserved 10 percent pay rise (£77,000 plus expenses and tax exemptions) for a part time job where they are told what to do why do you think the public sector gets upset? Is there a strategist who can work this out in your party?

        0.2 percent increase in public spending over seven years. You pointed this out to us in 2010 and the fallacy of spending cuts against tax rises. A lot of rhetoric about austerity and cuts which did not occur. Mervin King pointed out if cuts were made that party would not get elected for a generation. Hence no severe cuts. May is not advancing her/your party’s position/record she is letting Corbyn dominate even on his lunatic economics- why? She should be shouting how your part recovered the country from a Labour abys.

        May better get back in the game PDQ or your party is toast and jumping to the Corbyn fiddler’s tune. For the life of me I cannot think why.

      2. Newmania
        June 29, 2017

        1965 pop 55m appx
        2017 pop 65m appx

        housing cost / wages ratio increase due to pop growth is about 20%
        Housing cost wage ration increase in period is in fact something like one to one for a decent salary to anything from 5 times to ten times across much of the South East

        That problem has been consistently blamed on immigrants and that is a lie

        1. Anonymous
          June 29, 2017

          As you know, prices are affected at the margins.

          It only takes a shortage of 5% to create a bidding war on that margin, which is what is driving house prices through the roof.

          You craftily avoided the word *shortage*.

          Not one person denies that there is a shortage. Not one person denies that there is a housing crisis.

          To coincide with a schools crisis, a hospital crisis, a transport crisis.

        2. Edward2
          June 29, 2017

          More like 70 million plus according to supermarket footfall and food buying data.

        3. Narrow Shoulders
          June 30, 2017


          I think you will find the official current population is closer to 70 million plus undocumented and illegals which creates greater demand.

          The population increase is not spread equally across the land but concentrated in clusters which substantially increases demand in those areas.

          Demand affects price exponentially not in a linear fashion so your simple 20% calculation is misleading.

          Money creation practices by the banks enables the silly rises in house prices it is not the direct cause of it. Without the money prices most definitely could not rise so much but without the demand buyers would just go elsewhere.

          Government attitude to buy to let and social housing sales again constrains supply and so increases demand but ultimately there are more bodies to go in the homes which creates a bidding war.

          You can not stem the flow without cauterising the wound.

          Pursue other remedies by all means but take your head out of the sand at some point.

        4. stred
          June 30, 2017

          Google house price to earnings ratio graph and you will find a number of them, showing that the highest rise has been where population increase has been greatest. Do the same for UK population increase graph and, apart from a blip when mortgages rates dropped after the crash, the two graphs coincide. What more proof do europhile ostriches need? Keep taking the tablets.

      3. Hope
        June 29, 2017

        JR, why has May agreed to the EU interim budget increase? Why is she saying the UK will continue to pay benefits for children who never set foot here? Why is she still supporting overseas aid at its current level? Why is she agreeing to the waste of our taxes in this way when she claims in contrast social care cannot be afforded and expect us to sale our homes? Why is the lost cause Letwina never Grayling falsely saying we want to pay more taxes? In contrast she claims your party are a low tax party.

        Suggest someone with a brain and a little strategic savvy gets a grip of your party and eahat it stands for. Tax should be at a minimum, put our citizens first second anad ast before all the world. Humanitarian help yes, £14 billion on overseas aid and growing with GDP absolutely not. We still have a deficit that your party promised, as its central economic plank, to eliminate by 2015!

    2. eeyore
      June 29, 2017

      Newmania – This won’t seem so trivial to European taxpayers. I bet they don’t share your contempt for their money. By the way, how does one comb a mountain?

    3. Lifelogic
      June 29, 2017

      To reply:- Indeed it is just a statement of what the EU want more taxes and more powers to make a mess of things. Thank goodness we are leaving (if we actually are given the political arithmatic after Hammond & May’s political incompetence.

      1. NickC
        June 29, 2017

        Unfortunately Theresa May is a ditherer, perhaps well-meaning. But Philip Hammond is a menace to Leave – his delaying tactics seem designed to give him time to defeat our vote.

        We have to look at imposing a time limit to leave the EU, otherwise we may never get out.

    4. Roy Grainger
      June 29, 2017

      A smear is only a smear if it is untrue. I read this paper independently yesterday, what is most notable is that of the various options presented to plug the gap caused by their second biggest contributer leaving “Spend less money” does not appear.

    5. formula57
      June 29, 2017

      Do I recall correctly that Newmania is the one busily fighting for the very nature of truth so perhaps he has not time to talk about his admired Union? Bless!

    6. Ian Wragg
      June 29, 2017

      He’s an EU troll John. Ignore him he rants on several websites.

    7. A.Sedgwick
      June 29, 2017

      Brexit has not only preoccupied UK politics for a over a year but the EU bureaucrats and the largely unelected movers and shakers too. This has stalled the usual flow of straight banana regulation and the serious ground laying for the federal USE. Much of our focus should now be on how right the UK was to reclaim our sovereignty and not be increasingly subservient to Brussels. The citizens of the EU ain’t seen nothing yet.

    8. Richard1
      June 29, 2017

      Whilst we are rightly reminded by Remain supporters of the intellectual dishonesty of “£350m pw for the NHS” it would be good if more prominence would be given to all those claims made by Leave which were rubbished by Remain & which have turned out to be quite correct. These include: more EU taxes and control of budgets (above and ref also president Macrons new proposal); the EU army (now clearly announced as planned); and a new ‘social pillars’ regulation, which will mean more interference in social legislation, and of course make for a yet more sclerotic economy.

      1. Robert Christopher
        June 29, 2017

        So many go on about the incorrect figure of £350m/wk, when it should’ve the verb that needs ‘improving’.

        The EU GRABS £350m/wk …

        We then grab some back, at the end of the financial year, I think, and then the same thing happens the following year – but not for much longer. 🙂

      2. NickC
        June 29, 2017

        Richard, Give up your 20 a day smoking habit and you can fund a foreign holiday. That makes sense in English. It’s not a promise, it’s an example. And you are not compelled to fund, fully or even partly, a foreign holiday with the savings.

        Similarly the side-of-the-bus slogan (and slogans are by nature condensed rather than explanatory) said we send £350m pw – “Let’s fund the NHS instead”. There was no statement, let alone promise, that the £350m pw would be spent on the NHS.

        Given the ramifications of leaving the EU, this issue has deliberately been blown out of all proportion by Remains to cover up their gross falsehoods about what would happen if we were to vote leave: from recession, economic shock, emergency austerity budget, to WW3.

        You’ve been had by Remain propaganda.

      3. Ed Mahony
        June 29, 2017

        If were leading in Europe (along with Germany and France), instead of carping, then we’d be able to shape the EU for our benefit and the benefit of Europe (which in turn benefits us again).

        Being outside the club is just as bad as being inside with limited control. So instead of having limited control, let’s try and take control.

        And no, we’ve never actually tried to reform the EU (linked to a lack of leadership spirit), we’ve only tried to get concessions from it. Reform and concessions are quite different even though some/many make this category error again and again. History will judge us on this – and no, it’s not too late, yet, to try and take control of Europe for our benefit and the benefit of Europe (and the young and middle-aged will also judge us if our economy goes into decline for 10 or so years when many middle class, not just working class, middle-aged and young people are really struggling – in particular over housing but others things as well, including our national debt and the responsibility of having to look after the older generation as they grow older).

        1. Ed Mahony
          June 29, 2017

          ‘and the responsibility of having to look after the older generation as they grow older)’

          – Let’s not forget it that, overall, the young / middle-aged middle classes voted Remain, and the older generation from the same background voted to leave. The latter have money saved up and can afford to take risks, but their children and grandchildren not so much, and it is the younger generation that will pay the price for our economy going into decline for 10+ years if we crash out of the single market without a trade deal , whilst they have to look after the older generation. Resulting with many of these voting Labour / Liberal Democrat – and we’ll be left with a country being crippled by socialism again (a possible unintended consequence of Brexit, and all self-inflicted).

          1. Anonymous
            June 29, 2017

            Ed Mahony- The elders understand well the perils of inflation on their savings and the risks to their grandchildren – and that they may not have care in old age.

            Their decision was not reckless as it seems you intimate.

          2. Ed Mahony
            June 30, 2017

            ‘The elders understand well the perils of inflation on their savings and the risks to their grandchildren – and that they may not have care in old age. Their decision was not reckless as it seems you intimate.’

            – I’m not suggesting Brexit is reckless. There were good arguments for and against. What I am saying, however, is that the older generation had more financial security to take such a risk, and no doubt looking, nostalgically back at a very different Britain – now long gone (and/or those who want to import an American-style economy here that simply won’t work for cultural / social / historical reasons – outweighing the purely hard, neo-Conservative financial arguments).

            If Brexit is going to work, then we’re going to need a leader, over the next few years, who can repair all the divisions in our country including that within the younger and older middle class generation.

          3. James Matthews
            June 30, 2017

            The only way we would lead in Europe “along with Germany and France” is by going along with Germany and France, which is not leading at all. It’s the chap who stands beside his two “friends” and nods, because he doesn’t want to lose his them and knows they want his friendship less than he wants theirs. A humiliating and unsuccessful strategy for either a man or a nation. It would also, of course, mean joining the Euro.

            As to your prophesies of economic doom, well they might come to pass, no one really knows the future, but if they do the chances are that it won’t have much to do with membership of the EU, or the absence thereof.

      4. Dennis
        June 29, 2017

        “..the intellectual dishonesty of “£350m pw for the NHS”

        There was no dishonesty – read the side of the bus again and understand it.

        It seems many are either dyslexic or their command of English is lacking.

        1. Richard1
          June 29, 2017

          you are unfortunately wrong. 1) the £350m specifically for the NHS claim was repeated elsewhere, inc on a poster which Boris Johnson appeared in front of, & 2) The claim that £350m extra would be available was clearly inconsistent with Leave’s commitment to replace the existing EU funding on items such as agricultural subsidies. The true figure was £10bn pa (ie £200m pw) & even that will not be available as the UK will certainly wish to remain in some EU agencies which will have to be paid for. it would be better to come clean on this ridiculous slogan.

      5. old salt
        June 29, 2017

        On the subject of £350m a week a Mirror article of 29 March updated 30 March:
        The Boris photo shows “Let’s give our NHS ….” while the caption below the image the Mirror morphed “Let’s” into a “pledge” & “would” – “Boris Johnson on the Vote Leave campaign trail on 14 May 2016 with the pledge saying £350m a week would be given to the NHS”
        The bus picture also shows “let’s fund our NHS …… ”
        So when and where did “let’s” mean “would” ? – in Mirror and Remoaner speak.
        This needs nailing once and for all as this erroneous subject claim keeps on surfacing time and time again.

    9. Oggy
      June 29, 2017

      Dear Newmania@EUtroll,
      Is your first name Donald, Jean Claude, or Guy ? – whatever it is no one here is remotely interested in your ill informed and misguided rants.

      PS – by the way how did your support of the Lib Dems go in the General Election ? – hahaha.

    10. Anonymous
      June 29, 2017

      Never, during the referendum, did anyone try to sell us the EU.

      They still don’t.

      And yes. I did expect us to get poorer when I voted Brexit, a price worth paying. (Re Newmania on a previous thread.)

  2. Duncan
    June 29, 2017

    Quelle surprise! It seems our decision to leave the EU will prove to be an almost divine blessing in disguise for those rabid EU expansionists

    It is very disheartening to see nations and its people capitulate so easily. Once a nation’s sovereignty, independence and powers are taken under duress those EU member countries with hundreds of years of history will be simply wiped off the map

    At what point do proud, quasi-independent nations like Poland stand up and say ‘no more’?

    What have we got if we haven’t got our country, our heritage, our ground on which we live, our place on earth which we call our own? We have nothing

    Thank god the British people made the right choice last year..

    1. Andrew Black
      June 29, 2017

      Well said.

  3. Freeborn John
    June 29, 2017

    The UK should make it a red line in Brexit negotiations that there will be no fee for British travellers to visit the EU in future, in return that the Uk will not charge EU visitors to enter this country. These fees are the equivalent of customs duties on people conducting business and we need to stop their proliferation. One country introduces them and other reciprocate and before you know it we are all worse off. Post 9/11 paranoia about security has been used to introduce all sorts of illiberal impediments to millions of harmless businessmen & women and holiday makers and we need to roll them back.

    The Uk government should also raise the abolition of fees charged to Britons by the US “ESTA” and Australian e-visa in discussions on Free Trade Agreements with those countries.

    1. Ed Mahony
      June 29, 2017

      ‘The UK should make it a red line in Brexit negotiations that there will be no fee for British travellers to visit the EU in future’

      The EU will make sure we pay a high price for leaving the EU in order to stop others leaving the EU. If others left, the EU would crumble and that would cost the Europeans far more than a bad trade with the UK (not forgetting, they’ve already admitted that the UK leaving the EU is bad for them, but also for us, but the difference is that they can share the loss of trade between 27 countries, where as we have to take the loss of trade all alone by ourselves with 40% of our exports going to the EU).

      The Hard Brexiteers can’t win. It’s impossible. Because if we do crash out, our economy will go into decline for 10+ years, and people will simply vote Labour / Liberal Democrats into power, with socialism in the UK being far worse than EU red tape etc. So we get socialism, and the possibility of a second referendum. If people see their wages drop whilst not seeing immigration being reduced then inevitably they’ll vote to return to the EU, except that we’ll have to return on far worse conditions.

      I don’t see how Hard Brexit can work. If you think it can, please explain.

    2. Garretg
      June 29, 2017

      Regarding freeborn john
      People moving over borders to conduct business comes under the heading of freedom of services which is one of the four basic freedoms of the eu. If we are not in the eu then we will hardly qualify for freedom of movement to carry out business services through the remaining 27 countries- can’t see it in any other way- in any case then we will be more free to conduct business of services in other parts of the world.

      1. Ed Mahony
        June 30, 2017

        ‘in any case then we will be more free to conduct business of services in other parts of the world’

        – The EU isn’t stopping us conducting business or services in other parts of the world. Germany does a great job at that. Yes, the EURO helps. But that can’t be the main reason. The main reason is simply that Germany makes things and offer services that other people want to buy.

        1. Ed Mahony
          June 30, 2017

          Also like to add, the Germans have a fantastic leader in Mrs Merkel –
          a really steady, sane pair of hands, presiding over a relatively successful economy. Lucky Germans (but then you also make your own luck).

          1. Anonymous
            June 30, 2017

            Presiding over Europe, in fact. Always at the centre of EU photos.

            This is not insignificant.

  4. Nig l
    June 29, 2017

    Bring on the transaction taxes etc. More business for London (New York) as big corps switch their business. Let’s hit the tourist industries of already struggling Portugal, Italy, Greece etc, lets pile even more tax on drivers, the Germans will love that, let’s put up corporation tax and alienate the Irish, but good for the UK as companies come to us and finally let’s open the door to the logical conclusion of this, namely one budget etc reducing national governments to regional councils, thus alienating almost every one.

    Don’t you just love it?

  5. Mark B
    June 29, 2017

    Good morning

    Of course they lose far more than money. They lose our influence and position on the world stage, such as our seat on the UN Security Council, and a host of other bodies too.

    It will also be interesting to see what the likes of Denmark, Sweden, Poland and others do. When they come to realise what a heavy price must be paid yo be a member of the Stupid Club will they too want yo leave ?

  6. Narrow Shoulders
    June 29, 2017


    Mr Redwood would you publish the public sector total wages costs for the years 2013 – 2017 please to show that despite contraction in the workforce costs have risen more than 1%.

    Public sector pay is subject to grading and staff (often) automatically rise through the grades and receive pay rises accordingly. The pay cap is per grade not per person.

    Additionally please publish the pay bands to see where the largest increments have been awarded. I suspect that the nest feathers will be quite apparent.

    1. a-tracy
      June 29, 2017

      NHS pay scales, I think a graduate nurse starts on grade 5.
      I’m not sure how long it takes to move between each grade or band?

      1. hefner
        June 30, 2017

        See also
        Look for NHS pay and benefits
        Then Agenda for change – pay rates

        All those to apply from April 2017. Moving from one grade to the next depends on your suprrvisor’s report. It can be anything from 12 to 36 months. Moving from one band to the next depends on taking more responsibilities.

      2. John Finn
        June 30, 2017

        I’m not sure how long it takes to move between each grade or band?

        The inter-band incremental increases are paid automatically each year. To progress for one band to the next would normally require a promotion or job change.

        I know someone who has recently progressed to Band 6 after 2 years in nursing.

    2. John Finn
      June 29, 2017

      Public sector pay is subject to grading and staff (often) automatically rise through the grades and receive pay rises accordingly. The pay cap is per grade not per person.

      Correct. I’ve recently been looking at the accounts of my local NHS Trust hospital. Employee costs have increased from £272 million in 2011/12 to £347 million in 2015/16 – an increase of 27.6% or over 6% per year.

      To be fair, we should recognise that there has also been an increase in the number of staff but even after adjusting for staff numbers, the average FTE increase is still around 4% per year.

      1. a-tracy
        June 30, 2017

        We’re repeatedly told that staff numbers have been cut John, thousands less Police, fire, nhs staff, why can’t we just see the correct figures that our insurance and house rates are supposed to be paying for.

  7. margaret
    June 29, 2017

    Re Newmania : This is the problem John. Too many people trying to argue for the sake of argument against those trying to work things out. They cause delays and convoluted paths on the way to withdrawal .

    I see Mark Carney is now thinking about raising interest rates. May be helpful for savers .

  8. fedupsoutherner
    June 29, 2017

    What a pathetic response Newmania! It has been obvious to a blind man that membership costs would be going up at some time and that the EU wants to take over responsibility of many taxes eventually.

    It sounds to me like we are leaving at the right time. Only this morning on the BBC morning news they are reporting that the EU are going to tax carbon fuels more and that the UK must put in more money towards insulating homes. The sooner we are out of this club the better. The EU will demand more and more and tax us out of existence. No wonder they want us to pay a large exit fee.

    By the way, who was it that stated John was getting fewer and fewer comments on his blogs?? It looks pretty health to me at the moment.

    1. Bob
      June 29, 2017

      This blog gets huge volumes of comments, but our host cannot publish all of them, not least because he’s so busy with his day job.

      I surprised he manages to get though as much as he does.

    2. hefner
      June 29, 2017

      Indeed, but do not confuse quantity and quality of comments.

  9. Lifelogic
    June 29, 2017

    Mrs May seem to have noticed that there is “no magic money tree”, she is for once quite right.

    But there is a very good substitute for one. You cut out all the endless government waste, the daft projects like HS2 & Hinkley, the “renewable” subsidies, the greencrap, the vast proportion of the government that does nothing useful or worse inconveniences the productive, you encourage private provision in medicine, schools, pensions, saving & housing. You can cut policies that augment the healthy but feckless, you simplify and cut the reams of damaging and pointless red tape, you simplify employment laws, you go for cheap on demand energy, you get fracking, you relax planning and cut the greencrap from building regulations.

    In short you grow the productive sector and allow it to be more competitive and you reduce the size of the state that inconveniences it and parasites off it. You allow the private sector to compete in the World.

    Alas this seems to be the complete opposite of what (tax, borrow, regulate and waste) T May and P Hammond stand for. A total lack of uplifting true Conservative Vision, this is why they threw their majority, zero uplifting vision and their idiotic punishment manifesto.

    1. Denis Cooper
      June 29, 2017

      There is a lot of talk about “the magic money tree”, singular, but in fact there are four of them, they are located in the courtyard of the Bank of England and can be seen on page 11 of this guide to the Bank:

      “The four mulberry trees are reminders of the origins of paper money: the earliest form of paper money was produced in China in the 7th century and printed on paper made of beaten mulberry bark.”

      But the Prime Minister is not allowed to shake them to get more money; that is the role of the Governor, with the assent of the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

    2. stred
      June 29, 2017

      I noticed the amount of student debt is £100bn. The bribe was to forgive existing debt in addition to present. Corbyn’s figures don’t stack up and he supports HS2. We could build a low speed freight line using abandoned lines with new by-pass lines where built over and save £55bn plus operating subsidies. A Labour MP suggested this idea. Then passengers on HS1 could take a fast train from Kings Cross without taking the barmy travelator to Euston.

      Hinkley could be built for less by getting EDF to build the Korean design,
      which works and their president wishes to abandon in Korea. This could save more and keep electricity prices down.

      Build a sensible junction at Stonehenge instead of a £4bn tunnel. Then there would be enough in the coffers to offer low fees for useful courses and free nursing training. This would encourage universities to offer more of them. Not much chance with this bunch of duffers in charge though.

    3. roger parkin
      June 29, 2017

      Lifelogic. As always your contribution is entirely accurate. It’s so disheartening that few if any politicians are prepared to advocate this common sense approach. Sadly this wont change until the numerous career politicians who have had little or no experience of the real world are replaced with experienced successful businessmen and women.

  10. formula57
    June 29, 2017

    Germane comments but did not the Remain side assure us that like the EU army these things would never happen so are you sure the (alleged) EU report is not fake news?

  11. Bob Dixon
    June 29, 2017

    Leaving the EU looks better and better

    1. Lifelogic
      June 29, 2017

      Indeed but the Tories under May are alas making a complete mess of it. The forces for remain:- The Philip Hammonds, the BBC, most lawyers and bureaucrats, most of academia, the Ken/Greig Clarks, J Majors, Heseltines, Osbornes, Carneys, Mandelsons, Kinnocks, 50% of Tory MPs and about 70% of the Commons and perhaps 90% of the House of Lords.

      Will we actually ever escape in the end?

      1. Lifelogic
        June 29, 2017

        Plus all Libdims, SNP, Greencraps the Welsh Nats and the likes.

  12. Ian Wragg
    June 29, 2017

    Let’s just hope Mrs May doesn’t capitulate and agree to substantial payments after we’ve left.
    The people of Europe are not going to be too thrilled paying more taxes to prop up the Brussels gravy train.
    When national exchequer so start to suffer there could be an almighty backlash.

    1. Denis Cooper
      June 29, 2017

      Realistically they won’t notice the small loss.

  13. frank salmon
    June 29, 2017

    Fiscal union is inevitable in the EU. Targeting the UK, particularly in regard to a financial tax, was always on the cards. This is why I voted Brexit. Future tax and revenue spending, as well as more laws and intransigence were more important to me, and probably many others, than immigration. I hope are able to suspend any further encroachment on our freedoms, our taxes and our laws before we actually leave……

    1. acorn
      June 29, 2017

      There will be no fiscal union in the EU, as long as Wolfgang Schaeuble is German Finance Minister and Jens Weidmann is Bundesbank President. Neither of whom has any idea how a fiat currency economy actually works.

      Germany wins hands down from the Euro system, it over exports because its currency is nailed down by the other 18 Euro users. Those other 18 mismatched economies are effectively using a foreign currency; the German Euro.

      Getting rid of the Euro currency; EU Monetary policy; the European Parliament and four of the five presidents, would be a good start.

      1. acorn
        June 29, 2017

        Grandad, who won World War 2? It’s too early to tell yet, first estimates may have been wrong. Ask me again after March 2019, all the data will be in by then.

  14. Peter Wood
    June 29, 2017

    Good Morning,
    Surely the EU leaders are not being sufficiently ambitious? With the exit of the troublesome Britishers the EU should present a new United States of Europe contract for all members to sign up to (like it or not). With that done all the other minor irritations, such as ‘provincial governments’ can be disbanded and the central government could take control from Brussels, or Strasbourg, or Berlin….

    Newmania – it can only be a smear if the remarks are derogatory; this is their plan so you clearly think it is not very bright..

  15. BCL
    June 29, 2017

    If the EU does move towards greater political union it will confirm the wisdom of the UK leaving. Whatever the economic consequences and I believe that while there may be problems we shall be vastly better off in the long run, the British never signed up for the United States of Europe and have never been willing to accept it. We wanted the Common Market, and to a considerable degree still do, but not at the price of sovereignty being transferred.

  16. Martyn G
    June 29, 2017

    The Reflection Paper also pretty much insists that the extraordinarily high salaries and perks enjoyed by EU officials and civil servants must not be touched. And ends by telling us that the EU budget is the most tightly and efficiently run budget in the world. Really? How come the budget has not been signed off for decades and whomsoever tries to get to the bottom of that is treated like a pariah. The whole thing stinks to high Heaven of inward-looking Eurocrats determined to safeguard their own positions and continue to march to eventual domination of all European nations.

    1. mike fowle
      June 29, 2017

      Many years ago, my mother and I were having a pub lunch, and we got to talking to a chap there, who mentioned that his daughter worked in Brussels for the EU. And he said (which I long remembered): “You know, all those stories about exorbitant pay and luxurious perks and expenses in Brussels – they’re all true. It’s ridiculous what she is paid.”

      1. Longinus
        June 30, 2017

        EMA staff in London do not pay income tax. To work for them you have to be bilingual although all work is conducted in English. This clearly discriminates against UK scientists.

        1. hefner
          July 1, 2017

          Please explain why an international organization could not require its future employees to be fluent in several languages, specially when part of the job involves contact with different countries. In which case this requirement should apply to all employees, British included.

          Personally I do not think it discriminates against UK scientists. On the contrary it might help recruit more skilful British people, to the benefit of the organization.
          And from experience, international organisations set in Britain tend to have a contingent of British people whose number is higher (sometimes much higher) than what, say GDP or financial contributions to the organization, would in fact justify.

    2. Cloverdoguk
      June 29, 2017

      What do you mean the budget has not been signed off for decades? The MFF was signed off in 2013.

      1. hefner
        June 29, 2017
      2. Martyn G
        June 29, 2017

        With hindsight, decades indicates more than 20 years, which is not the case and so withdraw that comment. However, it is true that auditors who in the past have flagged up all sorts of inaccuracies and errors have been removed – indeed in one case hounded out of office – with their observations unresolved.
        The fact that the MFF was been signed off in 2013, some 4 years ago, can hardly be presented as evidence in support of the EU claim of its budget being ‘the most tightly run budget in the world’. Everywhere else in the real world, budgets are audited, set and managed on a yearly basis, so despite claims to the contrary, the EU audited finances are now 3-4 years out of date, are they not?

        1. Cloverdoguk
          June 29, 2017

          You are confusing budgets and audits. The budget sets the spending plans for the EU and is set in 7 year cycles called the MFF (multi year financial framework). This is approved by the European Council.

          The auditors check revenue and expenditure is properly reported and controlled and regularly give a clean audit report. They do identify some anomalies and fraud in expenditures but this is mainly due to national governments (including the U.K.) who transmit most EU expenditure.

          The accounts have had a clean audit report since 2007 – google EU court of auditors.

          The points about Accounts not being signed off are just Daily Mail lies I’m afraid.

          1. a-tracy
            June 30, 2017

            It’s a shame the Daily Mail don’t blog here, they need to come back on your accusation of “Daily Mail lies” quite a serious accusation if they are misleading people that read it.

  17. Iain Gill
    June 29, 2017

    Meanwhile back in the UK we cannot even run a normal timetable on southern trains, what a shambles we are.

  18. Andy Marlot
    June 29, 2017

    “The withdrawal of the UK will signify the loss of an important partner and contributor to the financing of EU policies and programmes. ” The one and only reason they wanted the UK to stay. They are desperate for our money.

  19. Bryan Harris
    June 29, 2017

    The commission has been talking about some form of direct taxation for some time, and it is clear why.
    Currently the commission and parliament have to suffer the interference of national states.

    Once they have direct taxation they will no longer need to even pretend to listen. The EU has the capabilities, and power, now to run everything from Brussels – let’s hope the smaller countries realise this, or there will be no possibility for a national referendum when the EU has absorbed them all as one under the flag of EU government.

    The EU doesn’t understand the concept of budgeting for something. Like an immature young girl they see something, they want it and expect some sugar daddy to pay the price… in the case of the EU the sugar daddy will be the citizens that earn, and the rich until they migrate.

  20. Bert Young
    June 29, 2017

    Keeping the EU together will now be extremely difficult without the continuing distribution of funds . The loss of our contribution will mean severe cut-backs that will be felt the most in the more deprived countries and will cause them to question the validity of their membership . The reason for their “punishment” negotiation with us is now obvious .

    EU fiscal integration will only make it worse ; the richer Northern countries will not want to see distribution of their wealth and the transfer of their tax and control disciplines transferred to a bureaucracy that has not had its accounts signed off for years . The profligacy that is evident in Brussels sends out all the wrong signals . The sooner we are completely free from this mess the better .

  21. Ken Moore
    June 29, 2017

    On the subject of EU interference, it seems that they have a hand in the Grenfell disaster.

    Builders can either adopt a cheaper and less inferior European standard or the more rigorous British standard BS8414.

    The European standard simply consists of burning a test sample of test material

    We are left with the absurd situation where the government would have to lobby the EU to get the EU standard changed for all member states. They cannot force builders to use the British standard under the rules if EU ‘Harmonisation’.

    ‘The choice is very much up to the builder, as contracts of this size must be open to competitive bidding and thus come under the EU Public Procurement Directive’ which dictates that EU standards are used.

    Richard North in his EU blog explains this much better credit to him for highlighting this issue.

    Perhaps Dr Redwood could explain this to the Labour party when they lecture us about how the tragedy was caused by ‘Tory Austerity’.

    1. stred
      June 30, 2017

      The British standards allow for testing the total composition of cladding for the required fire resistance, in order to allow more flexibility in design. The rain screen + 150mm insulation board used should have been fire resistant. It wasn’t. The manufacturer recommends a higher grade insulation board behind the rain screen and showed a non-combustible screen of a different type to that used. The higher grade insulation was not mentioned in the planning application and was probably not available. I have sent JR the manufacturer’s advice sheet, dated 2015, several times.

      If the insulation had to be tested sparately, as the EU test, then it would have been more likely to burn and would not have been useable. Must as most of us dislike the EU, blaming a British cock up on the EU just makes us look silly.

  22. Chris S
    June 29, 2017

    I read the paper yesterday and my conclusion is exactly the same.

    As usual, the Apparatchiks in Brussels have learned absolutely nothing from Brexit or the various opinion polls carried out across the EU. These all say there is great dissatisfaction with the EU amongst voters in almost every member state. As usual, UK voters have had the foresight to leave now. We are ahead of the curve, that is all and our democratic system is going to make Brexit happen, despite the best efforts of unpatriotic Remainers and Media players.

    The EU elite are just like Corbyn’s Momentum supporters : “One more push for a USofE and we’ll win the public over”. Well Corbyn won’t when his economic policies at last receive proper scrutiny from a well run Conservative election campaign.

    However, because there is such a democratic deficit in the EU, their plans will not have the inconvenience of having to face an election and they will simply push on regardless. Neither Marxists like McDonnell or Juncker and his cohorts in Brussels actually believe in democracy anyway. Sooner or later they will be pulled up short when another country, a member of the Eurozone, cries “Enough!”

    Italy must be close. They have already driven a coach and horses across EZ rules by committing billions to save their own banking system. Brussels has looked the other way overe this. Italy is now threatening to close ports to ships from other EU countries carrying economic migrants from Libya unless the now-illegal border fences come down and other Schengen states share the burden. They won’t.

    PS : Macron’s fauning over Merkel since his election has been sickening to watch. This
    love-in will last only until she screws him over the Eurobonds he so desperately needs to save his own decrepid economy.

  23. Mark
    June 29, 2017

    That the EU is only beginning to discuss these things now complements yesterday’s blog. They are just starting the internal negotiations necessary to cope with life after Brexit, essential to working out their Brexit negotiating position. In the mean time they have wasted a year failing to face reality.

  24. BOF
    June 29, 2017

    It may help the EU financial situation if they can find the large sum of money that simply disappears each and every year for the past 20 years and which prevents their accounts from being signed off by the auditors.
    A reduction of the EU army of officialdom may also be necessary.

  25. Epikouros
    June 29, 2017

    Two lessons can be learnt from the EU project. The first the larger governments grow in size, number and complexity the more voracious their appetite for acquiring, power, their citizens wealth and earnings and the less it is fit for purpose and the more dysfunctional it becomes. The second is that international trade and cooperation (globalisation) is a goal worth pursing but not by forming political and economic unions but by sovereign states individually and collectively engaging in exchange and interaction.

    Certainly by setting up bodies to facilitate the process like the WTO. Not with a body like the EU that has considerable powers and ever greedy for more or the UN whose remit is to assist in keeping peace in the world which if it confined itself to that would be an admirable institution but it does not so loses it’s legitimacy and usefulness.

  26. Epikouros
    June 29, 2017


    Well worth the read. Scathing about Theresa May as well.

  27. bigneil
    June 29, 2017

    One thing won’t change – the amount that will vanish into off=shore accounts. No matter when the EU crashes, the leaders ( and their families ) will be VERY VERY well off for the rest of their lives.

    and after fining Google over 2.4 Billion Euros – where is that going to go?

  28. Denis Cooper
    June 29, 2017

    JR writes above: “It is in line with many continental wishes for a full Union, and with what some of us predicted prior to the referendum. It is good the UK will not now be trying to stop them and will not be in line for paying.”

    I have mixed feelings about that. Firstly it is not clear that most ordinary people across the EU favour further integration ultimately leading to their sovereign nation states being subsumed into a federal United States of Europe. Secondly I doubt that such a development would be in our national interests: previous attempts to unify Europe have never been in our national interests. But on the other hand if we stayed in it we would have to rely on our politicians to resist and prevent that further integration, and they have never done that in the past except when faced with a major domestic rebellion against the proposal. Bear in mind that if it had been left to either Major or Blair we would have joined the euro, which of course would have made it much more difficult to leave.

    1. a-tracy
      June 30, 2017

      Would we be like Canada in relation to the USA?

  29. Denis Cooper
    June 29, 2017

    Off-topic, maybe the Italians are beginning to see sense:

    “Italy has said it might stop NGO vessels from disembarking rescued migrants on its territory after a recent surge in arrivals.

    Italian officials, who requested anonymity, told several news agencies on Wednesday (28 June), including Italy’s Ansa, France’s AFP, Germany’s DPA, and Britain’s Reuters, that the measure would affect all non-Italian flagged boats, except those operated by Frontex, the EU’s border control agency, and Sophia, an EU naval operation in the Mediterranean.”

    “The warning came after some 12,000 people arrived in the past five days, pushing the figure so far this year to more than 80,000 – a double digit increase on the same period last year.”

  30. Dan H.
    June 29, 2017

    Given what a bunch of contrary and short-sighted idiots the EU’s high command seem to be, I suggest that we try to paint their proposed Financial Transaction Tax as an example of European stupidity that no sane country would ever wish to enact.

    This would help to cement the idea that because Britain opposes the concept, it must therefore be an incredibly European idea and the very best thing to put into practice. It also helps that quite a few French economists think it to be a great idea.

    As we here all know, a Financial Transactions Tax was once enacted on the Swedish stock market, and in doing so a mass exodus of traders was produced. Were the EU to enact such a tax, a similar exodus of trade would ensue, with much of it going to the closest nearby trading centre, i.e. London. Irony indeed if the EU could be influenced to shoot its self in the foot to our net benefit!

  31. Brigham
    June 29, 2017

    Is it now time to build more nuclear power stations? If we don’t there is the possibility that, because we buy a lot of electricity from France, we could be held to ransom by a disgruntled EU.

    1. ian wragg
      June 29, 2017

      The French interconnector only has a capacity of 2GW which represents about 3.75% of our peak requirements.
      Recently France has been importing through the connector as they have their own problems with ageing infrastructure.
      Yes we should build more for our own security.

      1. stred
        June 30, 2017

        Macron has appointed their version of Caroline Lucas as minister and he wants to close their Nukes and run the country on wind and solar. The fact that this will not work has been demonstrated but they are taking no notice. We will need our own . At present, unless it is very windy and sunny, our nukes plus French supplement about 50% gas. This can be viewed on three gridwatch sites.

      2. Mark
        June 30, 2017

        Of course, if we end up supplying the French because they close down their nuclear plants, the effect is a 4GW change in supply, which is therefore 7.5% of typical peak demand. We might also find ourselves with a further 2GW supply flip on the BritNed connector. Plus another 2GW on the connectors to Ireland, so 8GW of risk, and twice the capacity of any others we install.

        Two new links are being developed with northern France, as well as a new cable with Belgium, all scheduled for completion by 2019, totalling a further 3.4GW of capacity, or 6.8GW of supply risk. There’s a further 4.4GW of connectors to France in planning stages, making our exposure to France potentially 8.8GW of direct capacity (17.6GW risk), plus extra via nearby Belgium and the Netherlands. These projects really should be halted unless the French will guarantee not to shut their nuclear plants in Northern France. We will also need to ensure that we have reliable dispatchable power of our own.

  32. Cloverdoguk
    June 29, 2017

    Perspective. Government spending of EU governments (ex UK) is around Euro 5,500 billion. Total EU budget is Euro 150bn. Even a 25% increase in the EU budget, plus covering the U.K. shortfall, is perfectly affordable.

    Likewise the UKs contribution to the EU is so small as to be almost irrelevant to the U.K. – net Euro 10bn on U.K. Government expenditure of £772bn, or around 1% of total government spending – as well as not that significant to the EU.

    So while there is lots talked and written about this, and the EU will try and gouge as much from the uk as possible, if the U.K. walks away the EU will be fine.

    1. a-tracy
      June 30, 2017

      Cloverdoguk, do you know how much the EU makes from the 80% of rest of the world imports into the UK? How much do they make from their % of VAT charged in the UK? How much do they make from fines and top ups?

      No one is thinking the EU won’t be fine, we want to be treated fairly and reasonably and as you clearly say they don’t need our money but we do, we are bursting at the seams in certain regions and destitute in others.

    2. stred
      June 30, 2017

      Cleverdog. At present EU countries are not matching the required 2% on defence. If they wish to have their own defence forces instead of Nato, they will need to spend as much as the US or British. 2%+ 1%= 3%. Then there is all the extra for the new ideas to pay for. And don’t forget the national expenditure on items that the EU requires but does not put through its books.

  33. outsider
    June 29, 2017

    Dear Mr Redwood,
    Thank you for highlighting this document. Having now read it, my overwhelming feeling is that the European Commission is way ahead of us in preparing for its post-Brexit future, whatever one may think of its intentions.
    The EU’s many member states and the Parliament’s many political parties are at one behind a common negotiating strategy. Even the members of HM Government are not united behind one negotiating strategy, let alone the parties in the House of Commons or the wider elite. Yet it is pretty clear what the main elements will have to be.
    Now the Commission is planning the future without the UK. Yet there seems to be nothing beyond vague trade principles coming from the UK Government or departments, Opposition, the media or think tanks about the direction of the UK without the EU: nothing about agriculture. manufacturing, replacing EU research grants, transport, energy, tax implications let alone discussion of important details such as patents.
    Or have |I missed something?

  34. ian
    June 29, 2017

    If they do any of this, if we leave the EU, it going to make their exports to us more expensive , and if the UK is not going to follow suit on what ever they do, they will have to put more taxes on goods going to the EU from other countries to make their own goods worth buying within the EU. It look like they want put up more barrier on goods and people going to the EU apart from refugees. It’s more like a iron certain going up.

  35. jonP
    June 29, 2017

    Yes.. if they are going to build a european army.. which i believe they are..then they are going to need to increase the taxes..and to a certain extent that is understandable since president Trump is not on side now while on the other hand Putin is pushing in the east in his usual crimea sneaky style making trouble for his neighbours.. so its understandable that the EU will eventually have to reorganise themselves.

  36. ian
    June 29, 2017

    As for putting more tax on energy and pollution, that completely the wrong way to go, Since the climate policy has been enforce in the the UK with idea from big businesses and politicians to export jobs to the far east where they make bigger profits. Pollution around the world has increased at least 3 to 4 fold since then with hundreds of coal power stations being built with millions of more cars, lorries, trains, and air planes, housing, malls, it has made next no difference to pollution in the this country, because of high population increases needing for more housing and offices with shopping malls and big increases in transport, including cars.
    Getting rid of ground pollution was always more important than getting of air pollution from coal because of the health of people, that’s if you believe in air pollution, but we do know that ground pollution does affect the health of the people.
    This country needs at least 10 large coal power station built on coal fields with at least 100 years of coal supply to produce the power needed for electric cars and lorries with trains to make a big cut in ground pollution where it counts.

  37. ian
    June 29, 2017

    I see UK bond price are going up nicely with the pound with stock market in the EU coming down with there new plans for the EU. If UK bonds rise 50% from last year which would be half of one percent on the 10 year bonds, that will put 24 billion a year on your interest payments, and with the extra spending now happening with cuts being abandoned, should be good laugh watching con party PMs explaining it away, better get ready now for who your going to vote for at the next election. I also see that there is new party being formed of ex British troops called the veteran and peoples party, and with the free parliament independents who were not ready for the last election, the next election should be quite a contest.

  38. cabbage lover
    June 29, 2017

    Just as the Irish are looking forward and have been looking forward for seemingly endless centuries to an Irish Pope, we British have been looking forward to a ethnic British MP in the Bundestag.Well we have had an SNP leader with mixed London and German ancestry and at least one Labour MP born in Germany from German parents. But I guess we shall have to wait a while longer for Merkel’s multi-cultural diversity to countenance a British Bundestag MP. The Irish and British have one thing in common: oh yes we do,we never hold our breath waiting for good news.

  39. Mr However nee But
    June 29, 2017

    Labour’s Chuka Umunna MP says in the Queen’s Speech Debate in Parliament as I type : “I fully accept the election of myself in my constituency in the General Election, however……”
    Sorry, that should read “I fully accept the vote to Leave the EU, however…”

  40. hefner
    June 29, 2017

    If what Robert Shrimsley writes today in the FT is only 10 percent true, it is to despair of the Conservative and Unionist Party. If it is 100% true that it might be easier to get the EU 27 to agree between themselves than to have the 23 Cabinet members on a common position, it is another nail in the coffin that anything that JR is peddling is of any relevance.
    And giving the nice mess described at various stages in the EU referendum campaign in “All Out War” by Tim Shipman, it is becoming more and more difficult to believe that the CUP has any clue about what to do with the EU, given that there would have to be a balance between the “desiderata” of the Palaeosceptics, of the Eurosceptics, of the “modernisers”, of the DUP, and of the various sub-groups within them.

    All for One and One for All. Oops, that was French Musketeers saying, not the CUP’s.

  41. Denis Cooper
    June 29, 2017

    I’ve just seen Labour MP Chuka Ummana claiming that if we really wanted we could control immigration from the EU while remaining in the EU single market.

    Well then, so why did Cameron make such efforts to persuade other EU leaders to agree to changes to EU rules – so that we could discourage – not directly prevent or limit, mind, just discourage – immigration from the rest of the EU?

  42. Ah ah Jim Lad!
    June 29, 2017

    Rebecca Long Bailey, Shadow Business , Energy and Industrial Strategy Secretary speaks in the Queens Speech Debate on BBC Parliament just now 16.48 hrs.
    Her hair this time hangs over her left eye disallowing proper vision. Repeatedly this lady has had hair to the left of her eyes , hair to the right of her eyes impeding her vision on TV with audiences of impressionable teenagers. She is not the only extremely intelligent and accomplshed female MP on all sides of the House who are hair-grip challenged.
    In industry and business for which this lady speaks, her voters employed, both female and male and lgbt would be firmly told by management and trades union alike ” Pin back your hair, it is dangerous and sets a bad example both to fellow staff and our customers. Repeat it is is very dangerous and can be personally injurious if only to your eyesight. ”
    Mr Corbyn should send her down to the countryside as Mao Tsetung would have done for re-education by the workers and peasants.

  43. Peter
    June 29, 2017

    UKIP today issued a statement saying that the UK should reclaim the initiative.

    The UK would just tell the EU we are going and cut short further posturing.

    With endless months and years of nonsense ahead this has its appeal

  44. Bottomed the problem
    June 29, 2017

    The new appointed investigator of Grenfell says he’ll get to the bottom of it. Well, his direction of travel is in keeping with the finest traditions of the House of Lords.

  45. Edward2
    June 29, 2017

    A key thing remainers have avoided answering is what staying in the EU will be like.
    It seems plain where “ever closer union” will take the EU over the next ten or twenty years.
    Uniformed taxation policy.
    Single currency.
    One foreign policy and one overseas embassy system.
    One centralised governing body.
    One defence force comprising police, armed forces and border forces under central control.
    All laws developed from the centre on topics like environment, health and safety,employment, consumer, travel, motoring, etc.
    Individual current member nations expanded to near 40 but reduced to the equivalent to our counties in terms of powers.
    All this and more is hidden from the public who see the EU as remaining as it is today.
    But it will not remain the same.
    The EU has big ambitions.

  46. Bert Young
    June 29, 2017

    John , I don’t understand why my post at 8.06am is still awaiting moderation when later posts are shown . Am I doing something wrong ?

  47. StephenS
    June 29, 2017

    Taxation without representation. Presidents and Prime Ministers elevated to delegates and facilitators of the new developing country of the Union Europa. Common currency, common army, funded by common treasury and common taxes and a talking shop parliament to add a veneer of democracy. Once again, Britain chose wisely and in ahead of the worst of it. Those trapped in the euro of course have no choice but to be swept along with it all.

    Thanks again Mr Redwood. A wise man well ahead of your time.

  48. rose
    June 30, 2017

    This should concentrate the Irish mind – but how do they get their politicians to see sense and follow us out?

Comments are closed.