• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Funding British membership in the EC/EU: The awkward quarrels over contributions, CAP funding and UK rebates.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Funding British membership in the EC/EU: The awkward quarrels over contributions, CAP funding and UK rebates. Britain has often been described as an "awkward partner" in relation to European Integration. It is, nevertheless, a major player in the process of integration. Britain finally joined the EC in 1973. On 9th may 1950 the French foreign minister, Robert Schuman, announced a plan for France and Germany to pool coal and steel production under a High Authority. He also invited other European nations to join them, Belgium, Luxembourg, the Netherlands (the Benelux states), Italy and Britain. The Benelux states and Italy accepted the offer. The six nations signed the treaty of Paris in April 1952; the ECSC came into operation in July 1952. Britain declined the offer. The negative attitude of the British government has been looked at thoroughly. All accounts accept the there were certain peculiarities of the British position that made it highly unlikely that its government would accept the proposal. Whereas in continental Europe, nationalism had been discredited through its association with fascism, in Britain fascism had never succeeded, and the war had been fought as a national war. ...read more.

Middle

While London was contributing heavily to farm subsidies, which swallowed up half of the EU budget, it only recouped a 7% share of the receipts. The developing position was unacceptable to the Labour government. The foreign secretary, David Owen, told the house of commons that the situation whereby the "United kingdom has the third lowest per capita gross domestic product in Community" yet was already the second highest net contributor to the budget "cannot be good for the community any more than it is for the United Kingdom, and promised that the government would "be working to achieve a better balance, especially in relation to agricultural expenditure, to curb the excessive United Kingdom contribution" (Hansard, 14 nov, 1978, col 214). Unfortunately, for the labour government, it never had the opportunity to work for a better balance because it lost office in the June 1979 election to the conservatives under the leadership of Margaret Thatcher. The new government soon took up the same theme concerning the budget. Shortly after coming into office, Sir Geoffrey Howe, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, announced that the size of the problem was far greater than the Conservatives had realised while in opposition. ...read more.

Conclusion

He went on to attack the idea of the juste retour which he said did not exist and should not exist: "the simple taxpayer cannot refuse to pay taxes only because he does not get back what he paid in". Commissioner Liikanen had a more detached perspective. He saw the British rebate arrangement as underlying the problems with the national net budgetary contributions in Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden and Austria. He expected countries to want "a generalised correction system" but the Commission had proposed not opening the rebate discussion until after enlargement when it would be unavoidable. While the UK only funds 13% of the budget, compared with its share of Union Gross National Product of 16%, British ministers point out that only 8% of the EU budget is spent at home, making the UK the lowest per-capita recipient of all member states. They also remind colleagues that, without the rebate, they would be financing 21% of the Union's spending. Even with the rebate, the UK is the Union's fifth-largest contributor while measurements of national wealth put it ninth in the EU league table. The UK still pays twice as much as France, Italy, Belgium and Luxembourg. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level European Union section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level European Union essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    "'A troublesome partner.' Using examples, to what extent would you say this comment accurately ...

    4 star(s)

    Also he believed that Britain would not be fully committed to the Union. With hindsight, he was broadly correct on both fronts. Plate 4: Edward Heath on bringing Britain into the EU Source 2 When Britain applied for the third time, through the Tory PM, Edward Heath, (pictured right)

  2. Why did Britain join the EEC in 1973 and not in 1957?

    pay more in and would in turn get less back than the other EEC countries. By not accepting these terms and negotiating the Six saw it as him trying to change the Community to suit Britain. Heath had to go against what Wilson had said and 'down play' the need for negotiations over agriculture.

  1. The Causes of the British General Strike 1926.

    Soon the mine owners announced that all workers had to agree with the terms they had stated by the first day of May - otherwise they would be sacked. The Trade Union were disgusted, and the executives met up on the 1st of May for a special Conference.

  2. The aim of this essay is to present the reason of British government changing ...

    in the near future, but also as a relationship between the EEC and individual EFTA states. Members of EFTA such as - Austria and Switzerland a swell as Britain it self- were still trading more with the EEC then with their EFTA associates.

  1. Explain the process by which EU law is made and the process by which ...

    However, this brings its own problems as the ECJ has no mechanism for enforcing its judgements. If a state does not implement a directive, it may be possible for a citizen of that state to rely on the effects of the directive if: * The directive is sufficiently clear (Van

  2. The Institutional Consequences of Domestic Politics on Africa's International Relations and Regional Cooperation.

    Scholars prophesized as international capitalism which has inevitably opened up new markets, redefined social relations both at domestic and international levels. This being referred here as globalization. This informs Scholte (1996) assertion that globalization refers the emergence and spread of a supra-territorial dimension of social relations.

  1. Why did many British colonies demand independence from Britain in the years immediately after ...

    the EEC was making more money than Britain. Also the good things about the EEC are that In the north of Britain is poorer than the south. The community helps the poorer areas by making grants to encourage new industries or other developments which is an economic benefit.

  2. Why are developing countries unhappy with the global arrangements under the Bretton Woods system?

    The fact that the IMF and World Bank are controlled by the richest countries in the world gives these countries the necessary control which enables them to control the conditions for providing loans (Stein, 2004:2). This system ensures that both institutions act primarily, in the interests of the richest countries,

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work