Is there a way the UK can negotiate the EU request for UK funds to help liberate Europe from the EU and boost economic growth? I believe so. What if the UK were to pay money but only in return for the restoration of democracy, self-government and prosperity in Europe?
The UK voted to leave the EU, and to end its net contribution to the budget, which hasn’t been signed off by auditors for over 15 years. Since joining the EU, the UK has contributed £130bn net to the EU and had a cumulative £400bn trade deficit with EU countries. The EU has spending plans for countries, since the people in these other countries avoid paying the taxes they are supposed to pay and then vote for corrupt and/or incompetent politicians who waste their money. These countries could easily afford the money if they had better habits – and also if there was no €uro, with exchange rates reflecting the competitiveness of each economy and competence of each country’s politicians.
The areas the EU feels the UK owes them money
- EU infrastructure projects, road and rail, in other countries
- Other investment projects after Brexit, for less developed countries
- Pensions for UK Eurocrats
- Liabilities for loans that fail with other countries
- Relocation costs of EU agencies to other EU countries
Firstly, adopting a fast track approach to Brexit could help, i.e. to get 70% of what the UK wants in 3 months:
- During Brexit negotiations, switch to EFTA/Single Market from current EU/Single Market
- Allowing the UK to freely negotiate trade deals with any country around the world
- UK having a seat on the WTO and other world organisations and voting
- Having a veto of any new regulations, for implementing in the UK
- Amend and repeal any EU and EEA regulations that are unnecessary for the UK
- Single Market regulations only affect the 9% of the economy that exports to the EU
- Controlling agriculture, fisheries, home affairs and justice
- No ECJ, with rulings and arbitration through the EFTA Court
- No EAW (European Arrest Warrant)
- Any UK aid goes to other EU countries directly, on a matched funds basis with the recipient country, i.e. no matching funds, no project
- New Eastern European immigrants get a 1 working year visa, points system for staying longer
- Other EU countries have free movement, unless unemployment over 7%, then only have a 1 year working visa, points system for staying longer
- Similarity between EFTA and EU Free Trade Agreements
(For more information on this point, compare the EFTA FTAs with those negotiated by the EU.)
People may be wandering why the EU is asking for any money at all. After all, the UK has helped Europe over the last more than 200 years, saving it from the actions of French and German politicians taking away the self-government of other European countries in the areas of: political decision making, foreign policy, taxation levels, regulations, judiciary control, media control, currency control, movement of people across borders, control of military in other countries. So what has changed after each conflict? Have German – and to some extent – French politicians finally learnt to respect the self-government of other European countries? – freedoms which Britain played a lead role in restoring, paying dearly both in lives lost and also financially. And now they want the UK to pay for upgrading to a self-governing democracy? Pay for the incompetence and corruption in other countries? Pay funds to help with vote buying in corrupt countries, and give an electoral advantage to politicians in power and so distort electoral outcomes? Have they no conscience or moral compass? Clearly not. Appeasement doesn’t work.
The EU is a symptom. The problems are caused by the failure of political systems in the various countries and also the censoring media that covers up what is really happening, and side effects of policies. How about offering to pay the EU some money if they upgrade their political systems?
€5bn – each country which has the €uro to have binding referendums on switching to original currency, implemented within 3 months of a referendum result, starting with the Deutsche Mark being the currency for other countries to peg their currencies to, starting with +/- 3% band, for first 3 months, +/- 6%, next 3 months, +/- 10% next 3 months, +/- 15% next 3 months, +/- 22% next 3 months, +/- 30% next 3 months, then float freely. Worth remembering, that the currencies are indicators of how well a country is run.
€5bn – Denmark, Finland, Austria, Netherlands, Sweden, Ireland have referendums on whether to switch to EFTA/Single Market
€5bn – the Single Market/EEA (European Economic Area), now becomes only an area for the free movement of goods, services and capital. The articles covering free movement, social policy and environment are repealed/deleted. These become each countries choice and also bilateral
€5bn – each EU country has a new law allowing petition/referendum for any treaty, agreement or any international laws, to do with other countries, e.g. trade in goods, services, capital and movement of people. Example 2% sign petition, binding referendum held within 2 months of petition, implemented within 3 months of result
€5bn – East Germany has a referendum to choose to become an independent sovereign nation, with own currency. Bavaria has a referendum to become an independent sovereign nation, with own currency, e.g. Bavarian Mark. Implemented within 3 months of referendum result.
€5bn – if all the above are done
Paid over 5 years. From a current £9bn net EU contribution per year.
What would the benefits of this expenditure be?
- Re-implementing national currencies will remove the price distortion by having an overvalued or undervalued exchange rate, thus removing the misallocation of resources, and allowing for more productive investments. Currently Germany has an artificially undervalued exchange rate and is thus able to sell more to other EU countries, so denying other countries within the Eurozone the ability to grow and use funds to invest in more productive assets and improving competitiveness. A booming European economy can only help UK exports. A booming European economy is less likely to see mass immigration, as many immigrants move for economic reasons – not because of the colder northern European weather!
- Britain’s traditional role has been in restoring self-government in European countries, after it has been taken away by other European countries. By having referendum processes in place, the root causes are being addressed – so reducing future possible problems.
- The side effects of the EU are addressed, i.e. Eastern European countries losing huge amounts of skilled and motivated workers, who they have educated. Also the EU is about centralising power and we can see that also leads to centralising of wealth in many countries, at the expense of the low income people.
In summary, there is an opportunity to turn the EU request for funds into an opportunity to restore self-government in all European countries. If Germany, France and EU want UK money, then the UK can choose the terms, including restoring liberty and prosperity in Europe. Or no money.