PARLIAMENTARY REPORT
subject to an amendment tabled by Mr Mark Reckless, MP (Con). The amendment called on the government “to strengthen its stance so that the next MFF is reduced in real terms.” Speaking to his amendment,
Mr Reckless argued: “We simply cannot afford to agree an inflationary increase to the EU. This country has 13 per cent less income than it had just five years ago, and we are seeing 20-per- cent reductions to domestic spending. According to the House of Commons Library, if an inflationary increase is agreed, next year it will amount to £290 million, every penny of which we will have to borrow. Hon. Members will have spoken to constituents on different issues, and police officers have been to my surgery. They understand that their pay is frozen, although they are less happy about changes to their pay and conditions and about not getting their increments; but they do not understand why other elements of the budget, particularly the EU, should be guaranteed inflationary increases, let alone inflationary increases all the way through to 2020.” The Shadow Minister, Mr
Chris Leslie, MP, (Lab) said that the opposition would support the amendment. He argued: “When times are
tough, not only in Britain, but in countries throughout Europe, it is all the more important
UNITED KINGDOM
that the negotiations on the next seven-year EU spending review—the multiannual financial framework—spurn the inflationary
Sir Tony Baldry, MP
tendencies which simply repeat previous settlements plus a nominal price adjustment. Heads of Government need to champion reform, get a grip on the fundamentals of the EU
rebate and who would surely surrender the rest on demand to curry favour with Europe. It is the party that, the last time it was in power and had the opportunity to negotiate an MFF, agreed not to a cut or a freeze, but to an 8 per cent real-terms increase”. Mr Leslie rejected those criticisms, arguing “we have been clear on our position for a long period: because of the stagnating economy and the pressures on public finances, a real-terms rise in the EU budget is wrong. We have been saying that for months”.
Supporting the government’s
position, Sir Tony Baldry, MP, (Con), drew on his experience of being a Minister in Sir John Major’s government. He argued that having MPs of a government party voting against the government’s negotiating strategy weakened the Prime Minister’s position in Europe. He went on to say “the Prime Minister has made it clear what he wants to achieve. If he achieves a freeze in the EU budget, he will have done something that no other Prime Minister has ever managed”. In contrast, Mr Connor
Mr Connor Burns, MP
budget and reverse that upward trend. There is a very simple test for the summit on 22 November: will member states just keep rolling forward the EU budget, plus inflation, or can they achieve a real-terms reduction?” His position was criticized
Mr Chris Leslie, MP
by some on the government side, who argued that the previous government had been responsible for increases the EU Budget and a decrease in the United Kingdom’s rebate. The Financial Secretary argued, “those sitting on the opposition front bench are the same men who gave away so much of our
318 | The Parliamentarian | 2012: Issue Four
Burns, MP (Con), argued that supporting the amendment would strengthen the position of the Prime Minister. “This House matters again. As a united House of Commons, we have the opportunity to back the Prime Minister by sending him emboldened to the European Council with the clear message from the British people that enough is enough. If we are taking cuts, the European Union must take them, too.” On the other side of the
House, Mr Mike Gapes, MP, (Lab) observed that the European Union employed less than half the number of civil servants than Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs and that the EU budget was less than 1 per cent of the EU’s GDP. Nonetheless, he argued in favour of a cut to its budget and criticized
the government’s negotiating positions – arguing “the Polish and German governments and many others want the U.K. to stay in the EU as partners, but they will not wreck the EU to keep us. We need to realise that our options are narrowing. The government are in danger of taking us into an isolationist position”. Concluding the debate,
the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, said: “It comes down to this: we want to see a real- terms cut in the budget. We all want to negotiate for that. That is the position that unites most Members of the House, but in seeking to advance that agenda the Prime Minister has done something historic, something that no Prime Minister during the history of our engagement with the European Union has managed to do, which is to secure from the most powerful allies that we have in the European Union a position that we should negotiate for the first time a cut over seven years in the EU budget, or a maximum of a real-terms freeze. That was agreed two years ago
Mr Mike Gapes, MP
and has been scrutinized by the House in detail. Having put that to the House, it is reasonable for the Prime Minister to go into the negotiating chamber able to deliver on the commitments that he has had from his colleagues there.” The result of the vote on the amendment was 307 in favour,
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112