---

Future EU Finances and Own Resources

The hon. Gentleman gave evidence to the European Reform Forum that we set up, and he has the advantage of being able to read the evidence that Will Hutton, the rapporteur to the Kok report, gave to the forum, which is on the transcript and in the public domain. It would be well worth the hon. Gentleman and others reading what Will Hutton had to say about the Lisbon agenda. Despite further such attempts being made since then to deal with this issue, there has been no improvement. There is another issue about which I am deeply worried. The European Scrutiny Committee was obliged to say the following in its report:"““It is regrettable that it was not possible to have the debate we recommended on this issue before matters had progressed so far on the new Inter-Institutional Agreement. Nevertheless, we still think a debate on the Floor of the House worthwhile.””" At the heart of that comment lies the fact that this House is being treated with contempt. We are being invited to debate a matter that, to all intents and purposes, has already been sewn up. I regret to say that it has been sewn up with a degree of misrepresentation, in that the figures have been increased and we were not given the chance to debate the issue in sufficient time. The own resources decision will have to be debated in the context of a forthcoming European finance Bill. I have asked Ministers when we will have that Bill on a number of occasions, including via a written question. Labour Members—indeed, all straightforward, honest Members of this House—have a decision to make: whether, in the light of the manner in which the House has been treated, they are prepared to vote against their own Government on that Bill. The opportunity to do so will certainly arise, and I strongly urge them to do so. Our report also pointed out that this debate could examine the increase in the financial perspective ceilings. As my hon. Friend the Member for Altrincham and Sale, West (Mr. Brady) said, the former Minister for Europe stated in his explanatory memorandum as recently as 21 February that the Government would strongly oppose any proposal to increase the overall expenditure ceiling agreed by the European Council. However, the honest truth is that the Government simply rolled over, and at considerable expense to our own taxpayers. Our report also suggested that the debate should look at the reasons for any reallocation of spending between different expenditure headings. The then Minister for Europe said in February that the Government,given the ““delicate nature”” of the European Council compromise—I love the way that they put it, but in fact the compromise involved rolling over in the face of President Chirac and pathetic grovelling to other member states—apparently did not see any scope for re-allocation. It is quite disgusting to read how they tried to weasel their way out of explaining what is, in reality, a complete and total failure to subscribe to the principles set out by the Prime Minister during Prime Minister’s Question Time on 5 June last year. The report continues:"““The Minister asserts that the European Council agreement represents a good deal for the EU and a good deal for the UK.”” " Well, it will cost a good deal of British taxpayers’ money, but it is not a good deal for them. It is pathetic to have to say so, but the report continues:"““He notes that the proposed total EU expenditure over the period would be €862 billion.””" We know that that figure has gone for six. The report continues:"““As a share of EU GNI, this would mean that the total expenditure ceiling would fall from 1.1 per cent. of EU Gross National Income in 2007 to 1 per cent. in 2013, the lowest level””—" it is claimed—"““in 20 years. Nevertheless it is an increase in real terms of 13 per cent. compared with the current period.””" That is the point. It also states that there will be"““significant increases in EU spending on priority areas, including…a real annual average increase in spending on research and development of 7.5 per cent…a sevenfold increase in regional spending””—" that is very important and serious—"““from €24 billion…to €174 billion in the next…period””." That is where the money is going. When we talk about regional spending in relation to the UK and elsewhere, we know what it means. The report also mentions"““the real annual average growth in spending on freedom, security and justice of 15 per cent…and…an increase of 4.5 per cent…in spending on external actions.””" The plain fact is that this is a travesty and a disgrace. This is not a take note motion and there is more than enough reason for the Opposition and Labour Members to vote together to reject this ridiculous financial management.