EU cannot be serious...

I consider myself to be a pretty moderate Conservative. Although I'm broadly against the vast amount of bureaucracy that hits us from Brussels on a regular basis, I also see the benefits of remaining within the European Union and so am not often prone to fits of Euroskepticism.

That said, they're really pushing my patience at the moment with the news that they are trying to increase member states' contributions to the EU by 6%. A 6% rise in the money we give at a time when the majority of the EU states are under immense financial pressure? Thank you Herman van Rompuy!

The proposed rise lead to interesting scenes in Parliament yesterday, when 37 Conservative MPs supported an amendment by Douglas Carswell to reduce our payment to the EU. In doing so these MPs defied the Government whip, which was calling for support for an amendment to merely freeze the payment (which later passed).

I understand the Government's position on not being able to reduce our payment to the EU. According to Treasury Minister - the excellent Justine Greening - under the EU's own laws, this is illegal (see what they've done there?!) At the very least, I am glad that this Government is taking a sensible stance on Europe. It remains to be seen how our MEPs will react (particularly, as the Spectator blog mentions, the Labour MEPs), but I hope that the EU finally sees sense. In the 'age of austerity' Europe currently finds itself in, this is no time to start taking more money from countries facing difficult financial decisions on national services.

+++UPDATE+++

Interesting. I see from ConservativeHome that Justine Greening actually wanted to go further:

"We want to see the 2011 budget cut. The problem with the amendment is that if we withdrew our money from the EU, under its terms that would be illegal. We cannot support an amendment that would make our action illegal, so we will have to reject it, but I can tell my hon. Friend that if he had worded the provision slightly differently, we might well have been able to support both amendments. It is with regret that we have to reject his amendment, despite agreeing with its sentiments."

A Letter to the Guardian - Part 94

A proper blog with my thoughts on Conservative Party Conference to follow shortly, but first more amusement in this week's Epsom Guardian, where my letter of last week seems to have struck a nerve with Dr. Ted Bailey of Larkspur Way:

I bashed out a vague reply on the train this morning. It will obviously be cut down extensively should I choose to actually send it in, but I thought I would post it here for posterity.

It would take too long to ‘fisk’ Dr. Bailey’s letter (‘Speed and depth of public cuts doom us’) in its entirety, but I do offer these brief points by way of reply.

I do not view my projections for the private sector as unduly optimistic. The private sector created more than 300,000 jobs over the Summer months. The lowering of business rates and cancellation of NI for the first ten employees of any new company point to this pattern continuing.

Dr. Bailey is also wrong to suggest that the UK has seen ‘already savage cuts’ since the election. I know of no Governmental cuts to Sure Start since May. As to the cancellation of the BSF, if he wishes to defend such a bureaucratic monstrosity good luck to him. He will have to explain the merits of a school building scheme where it can often take three years to negotiate the planning process before the first brick is laid on the building itself; a scheme that saw costs rocket from £45 to 55bn due to consultant spend and red tape; and a scheme that was already three years behind schedule in 2009.

The countries he mentions in his letter as currently heading toward ‘double-dip’ recessions make my point for me, in that they are examples of what can go wrong if high spending is not restrained over a prolonged period of time. Interestingly, I was going to use Ireland as an example of a country which successfully managed to heavily reduce its spending whilst increasing economic growth, in the 1980s, but was unable to do so for reasons of space. I welcome the chance to do so now!

A final note. Alistair Darling did not propose a slower cuts programme, merely a smaller reduction over the same time-scale; 40% structural deficit reduction in 4yrs, rather than total reduction as the current Government is planning for. However, with current interest rates on our debt coming in at over £100m per day, I believe cutting our debt completely in this time-frame is no longer an aspiration of an Opposition – it is a necessity of Government.

James Tarbit

Deputy Chair, Political

Epsom and Ewell Conservative Future

P.s. For the record, Conservative Future is the section of the Conservative Party for under-30 year olds. With a membership of approximately 20,000, it is the largest youth political organisation in the UK.