The EU and how it works

Thank you for all this info, very interesting and much appreciated.

OK Just thought I would add some more information as really I should have done it before but forgot about this subject and it is to do with the

EU'S ANNUAL ACCOUNTS AND THE SUGGESTION THAT THE AUDITORS IN LUXEMBOURG HAVE REFUSED TO SIGN THEM OFF.

The EU financial year runs from Jan to Dec. out of interest

Now - in various media reports there has been the usual shouty headlines declaring that the Independent Auditors in Luxembourg have refused to sign off the end of year accounts, so I thought it would be useful to look at the truth behind these noisy headlines.

Annual Accounts. - The Commissioners Accounting Officer, must produce the annual accounts for the EU and the Commission.
They compose - just like a company accounts of
1.Financial Statement with accompanying notes
2.The consolidated reports on the implementation of the budget including account for the European Institutions and it's Agencies - which we know about.

Since 1994, the Auditors have been required to produce a Declaration of Assurance that the entire annual budget can be accounted for.

Just like any other set of annual accounts - there will be what is called "material error" - this allows for a certain level of inaccuracy where not everything has necessarily been verified by the auditors.The percentage of material error will vary from company to company and in this case from Nation to Nation. So this is where the headlines have pinpointed a problem, as even relatively minor omissions are reported.

The EU auditors have indeed criticized the EU expenditure for having between 4 - 7% of errors, however these were largely due to administrative error and not especially fraud. Never the less this compares reasonably well if we look at the material error in other member nations accounts. The error also largely occurs at member nations at government level for EU expenditure.

The media therefore seems incorrect when stating that the auditors have refused to sign off the EU annual accounts. in fact the accounts have been signed off every year since 2007 by independent auditors as free of "material error"

The EU has balanced it's accounts every year and has no debt or borrowings.

Just out of interest an annual statement is prepared for the UK parliament giving details of the EU budget.

Bump

The UK is the most unequal country in the EU.

i100.independent.co.uk/article/the-uk-is-the-most-unequal-country-in-the-eu--l1It2nHEZb?utm_source=indy&utm_medium=top5&utm_campaign=i100

Yes, you're right whitewave but it very much depends on individuals or groups finding out for themselves. When the referendum comes round, both "sides" will be pushing a skewed view, rather than presenting actual facts. A bit like a general election I suppose, but leaving the EU has much more far-reaching implications than electing one party or another for a five year term has.

Having said that, I think it's unlikely that we'll leave because it appears that most businesses are in favour of membership - and it seems these days it's what businesses want that counts. Even though I'm marginally in favour of staying in, I don't like the idea that powerful businesses are likely to use every scare tactic in the book to get a yes vote.

Hopefully we have made a start to educate ourselves eloethan

Thanks for your posts "whitewave" - very helpful and informative.

My husband and I disagree on the EU issue. On balance, I think we should stay in but I do have several misgivings about the way it operates. It seems to be such a distant organisation and very few people - including myself - are aware of its day-to-day operations. There also appears to be a greater opportunity, given the size of the organisation, for corruption and misuse of power. However, on the plus side, I think it offers more protection for consumers, employees and the environment - though presumably that could change.

It seems to me that whether you are part of something like the EU or whether you try to be as self-contained and self-determining as possible, there are dangers in all systems. Nationalism can be small minded and intolerant and globalism can destroy national identity and culture. What is really important is the quality of the people elected to power and that is presumably dependent on the population being properly educated and having a good grasp of what is happening in their own countries and worldwide.

dj and whitwave I think we agree on that, but, bearing in mind that there are people who want to be rid of both Scotland and the EU (eg ukip) , I can see problems ahead there.

Yes we would probably OK in the EU if Scotland left us, but we would struggle outside of the EU I reckon.

Agreed, whitewave, although if I lived in Scotland I would have voted for SNP, if only to stop being ruled by the Westminster elite.
Scotland is the same size as Denmark, and they manage to live quite comfortably within the EU rules.

Yes my worse nightmare is - UK comes out of the EU - this triggers another referendum in Scotland and they leave the UK and then we are left with a rump of a Kingdom, that is so small it matters to absolutely no-one in the world and our economy really struggles,

Thank you whitewave for a very objective and informative series of posts.
Should the referendum go the wrong way (ie out) that could be instrumental in triggering a second independence referendum in Scotland.
If Scotland chooses to be part of the EU it would be outrageous to be dragged out unwillingly by RUK.
Depending on your feelings about Scottish independence this could influence your vote in either direction.
Scottish parliament and EU are both anti-TTIP.

Thank you whitewave for taking on this mammoth task.
Like Iam64, I voted to join the Common Market and I have never regretted it. I know people who voted against joining who have long since felt relieved that their view didn't prevail.
I think there will be many GN members grateful to be able to refer to this thread over the coming months.

Agreed, whitewave.
It always surprises me when people I know show they are anti immigration. I just cannot understand it at all. But I do not want to start arguments.
I just say so you think ... should go back home, do you? Oh, no that's different.

No matter how much you say that migrants contribute to the economy, the newspapers always win in their arguments, because most of them do not give those statistics.
Many migrants also do not live up to their work potential. They are often much better qualified than their equivalents in the workforce, because they are willing to take most jobs.

Thank you so much whitewave for all your work and for managing to remain objective.

I plan to set aside a quiet hour to re - read this. I voted to join the EU and remain committed to this country staying in Europe. I have, like many people, been anxious about the impact on public services of the open borders policy. I read the comments about that with interest. Thanks again

One thing that this exercise has has persuaded me is that I felt ambivalent about migrants and did not quite grasp how much they contributed fiscally to the UK and how this goes towards supporting the likes of retired folk and others. I am now of the opinion that the issue about migrants is a red herring and it would be relatively easy to change peoples' mindset if the media/government so wished.

If we do not do it on this thread, whitewave, the thread will get lost, and others will have to search for it. Shame after all your hard work.

So, as said above,

Reason for staying in;
protection for NHS from TTIP.

You've done a great job, whitewave. Nit-picking can be done either on this thread or another, but I applaud your commitment!

Good idea, whitewave. I think you've done your bit, thanks a lot.
So just simple reasons to stay in or reasons to leave.
With evidence?
Do not know how you managed it, being so objective.

Just to say that none of it is my opinion/words in the in/out debate I copied and condensed it. So if there is anything left out it was because I didn't find it. Or at least missed it.

DJ I think that this could be over to all the grans to put their pennyworth in and add to the in's and out debate from now - do you think that a good idea?

No mention of NHS in reasons for staying in EU; saving it from TTIP?

And...breathe!

Thanks, whitewave.

THE END

ARGUMENTS FOR LEAVING THE EU - BREXIT I must say that these arguments don't seem so "put together" as the other lot.Perhaps as time goes on they will improve.

1 MAKE STRONGER TRADE DEALS - with other nations. Be able to establish bi-lateral agreements with a fast growing export market like China, Singapore, Brazil, and India though the World Trade Organization.
2 SPEND UK RESOURCES - (presently through EU membership) in the UK to the advantage of our citizens
3 CONTROL OUR NATIONAL BORDERS
4. RESTORE BRITAIN'S special legal system
5. De-regulate the EU's costly mass of laws
6, Make major savings for UK consumers
7 Improve the UK economy and generate more jobs
8. Regenerate UK's fisheries.
9 Save the NHS from EU threats to undermine it by harmonising healthcare across the EU and to reduce welfare payments for EU citirens.
10. Restore UK customs and traditions.
11. There would be a jobs boom when businesses are freed from U regulation.
12. UK would save billions in membership fees and end the hidden tariff paid by UK taxpayers when goods are exported to the EU
13 UK remains part of NATO and the UN security council and a nuclear power, with a powerful global voice in its own right
14 Major shot in the arm for UK democracy, as we would regain our sovereignty.