Crosswords3 mins ago
Boris Speaks !
Brexit: Boris Johnson repeats Leave's £350m for NHS figure
http://
http://
Answers
Boris is after the Tory leadership and all he has done in the last 2 years is aimed at that end. As I have said before, just 8 hours before the official start of the EU referendum he phoned Cameron and offered to change sides and support 'Remain' if he was given the Party Leadership as his reward. Cameron refused and the rest is history. But Boris is ,always has been...
13:12 Sat 16th Sep 2017
Let’s take a step back from this errant nonsense for a minute.
In 2016 the UK actually sent the equivalent of £252m per week to the EU. This is the figure provided by the BBC and that organisation would be the last to exaggerate such amounts. This is the amount we actually send as our “rebate” is deducted before the net amount is sent. This is £13.1bn per year. Arguing whether it is £350m or £250m per week is pretty pointless. It is an enormous sum. This is especially so when remembering that following the recent announcement that an extra £1bn would be provided to fund projects in Northern Ireland (a part of the UK, remember) all hell broke loose.
The notion of a “rebate” is interesting. Without it the UK would send nearer £350m per week. This rebate (I won’t put it in inverted commas any more, but it needs to be) was negotiated by Margaret Thatcher to compensate for the fact that the UK receives a disproportionately lower benefit from the Common Agricultural Policy than most of the other (then) member nations. This rebate was reduced recently by agreement with Tony Blair on the understanding that a “drains-up” reformation of the CAP would follow. The rebate was reduced but needless to say the CAP remains as it is with its most prominent beneficiaries being French farmers (who threatened to set fire to things should their subsidies be threatened).
Even though the UK’s contribution to the EU budget is “only” a tiny £252m per week (rather than the enormous £350m claimed on the side of the bus) it is a considerable sum of money that would be better controlled by the UK government. To argue that the battle bus caused millions to vote to Leave is totally spurious. As I have said before, the entire referendum campaign was laced with exaggerations, half-truths and downright lies from both sides. That’s what politicians do. It is up to the electorate to sort the wheat from the chaff. To keep on harping back to this small aspect of the Leave campaign is utterly pointless. The issue is that UK taxpayers’ money should be under the control of UK politicians whom the electorate can elect or dismiss. None of it should be entrusted to foreign civil servants so that they can dole it out to all and sundry with little or no benefit to the UK.
In 2016 the UK actually sent the equivalent of £252m per week to the EU. This is the figure provided by the BBC and that organisation would be the last to exaggerate such amounts. This is the amount we actually send as our “rebate” is deducted before the net amount is sent. This is £13.1bn per year. Arguing whether it is £350m or £250m per week is pretty pointless. It is an enormous sum. This is especially so when remembering that following the recent announcement that an extra £1bn would be provided to fund projects in Northern Ireland (a part of the UK, remember) all hell broke loose.
The notion of a “rebate” is interesting. Without it the UK would send nearer £350m per week. This rebate (I won’t put it in inverted commas any more, but it needs to be) was negotiated by Margaret Thatcher to compensate for the fact that the UK receives a disproportionately lower benefit from the Common Agricultural Policy than most of the other (then) member nations. This rebate was reduced recently by agreement with Tony Blair on the understanding that a “drains-up” reformation of the CAP would follow. The rebate was reduced but needless to say the CAP remains as it is with its most prominent beneficiaries being French farmers (who threatened to set fire to things should their subsidies be threatened).
Even though the UK’s contribution to the EU budget is “only” a tiny £252m per week (rather than the enormous £350m claimed on the side of the bus) it is a considerable sum of money that would be better controlled by the UK government. To argue that the battle bus caused millions to vote to Leave is totally spurious. As I have said before, the entire referendum campaign was laced with exaggerations, half-truths and downright lies from both sides. That’s what politicians do. It is up to the electorate to sort the wheat from the chaff. To keep on harping back to this small aspect of the Leave campaign is utterly pointless. The issue is that UK taxpayers’ money should be under the control of UK politicians whom the electorate can elect or dismiss. None of it should be entrusted to foreign civil servants so that they can dole it out to all and sundry with little or no benefit to the UK.
That's their (the electorate's) job. It has been throughout the ages.
The figures are quite easy to come by with a bit of research. That's if you need to establish the exact figure. Personally I don't care if it's £350m, £250m or £4.19.11d. I don't want foreign civil servants to have any control over UK taxpayer's money.
The figures are quite easy to come by with a bit of research. That's if you need to establish the exact figure. Personally I don't care if it's £350m, £250m or £4.19.11d. I don't want foreign civil servants to have any control over UK taxpayer's money.
Khandro/// Spicerack; Disprove it then, such statements cost you nothing.///
Trust me, Khandro, I'm on your side. I simply said not to put too much faith in Full-Fact figures, I said they were bigger twisters than the BBC.
So, you put up a BBC figure to prove me wrong.
The figure on the side of the bus relates to 2015, the last year we KNOW how much we paid.= £19.5 Billion gross.
The estimated figure for 2016 is £17 Billion gross.
They highlight the £13 Billion (nett) and highlight the £5 Billion (we get back) to make people believe we only paid in £8 Billion(nett)
It obviously works because you then quoted that figure to Gromit.
As I said, they're proEU shills like the BBC. (and about as trustworthy)
Trust me, Khandro, I'm on your side. I simply said not to put too much faith in Full-Fact figures, I said they were bigger twisters than the BBC.
So, you put up a BBC figure to prove me wrong.
The figure on the side of the bus relates to 2015, the last year we KNOW how much we paid.= £19.5 Billion gross.
The estimated figure for 2016 is £17 Billion gross.
They highlight the £13 Billion (nett) and highlight the £5 Billion (we get back) to make people believe we only paid in £8 Billion(nett)
It obviously works because you then quoted that figure to Gromit.
As I said, they're proEU shills like the BBC. (and about as trustworthy)
returning to St Nige and The Nige's principled stand AGAINST the £350m rebate that goes to the NHS a week !
[I dont think]
Now here is someone who DID stand on her principles and DID speak out at the time and not a day later:
....."The Conservative MP for Totnes, Devon wrote in her blog that a ‘financial lie’ had ‘knowingly’ been put at the heart of the vote leave campaign, which implied a ‘financial bonanza for the NHS’.
‘It's an empty promise and one which would soon backfire,’ she said.
‘A strong economy has always been the cornerstone of funding for the NHS and for all the arguments about the scale of the economic turbulence, the clear consensus is that the effects would be significant and negative. Far from a leave dividend there would be an economic penalty and the NHS would suffer the consequences.’
step forward Dr Sarah Woolaston
[I dont think]
Now here is someone who DID stand on her principles and DID speak out at the time and not a day later:
....."The Conservative MP for Totnes, Devon wrote in her blog that a ‘financial lie’ had ‘knowingly’ been put at the heart of the vote leave campaign, which implied a ‘financial bonanza for the NHS’.
‘It's an empty promise and one which would soon backfire,’ she said.
‘A strong economy has always been the cornerstone of funding for the NHS and for all the arguments about the scale of the economic turbulence, the clear consensus is that the effects would be significant and negative. Far from a leave dividend there would be an economic penalty and the NHS would suffer the consequences.’
step forward Dr Sarah Woolaston
