More UKIP bother

Okay if you think we're still talking about Leeds City Council that explains a lot. There are well over UK 50,000 public sector employees earning over £100,000 pa. By contrast David Cameron reckons there are 5,600 EU employees earning over 100,000 Euros pa - ie c£80,000pa. Bit of a difference wouldnt you say?

My figures came from here http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-%2F%2FEP%2F%2FNONSGML%2BCOMPARL%2BPE-480.777%2B02%2BDOC%2BPDF%2BV0%2F%2FEN

I picked all those earning > 10k Euros pm

With regards to the UK public sector, I would suggest that you are not comparing apples with apples. Maybe we should look at the Westminster civil servants and salaries over £100k as percentage of workforce and compare that to their EU counterparts.

My figures came from here http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-%2F%2FEP%2F%2FNONSGML%2BCOMPARL%2BPE-480.777%2B02%2BDOC%2BPDF%2BV0%2F%2FEN

 

I picked all those earning > 10k Euros pm

 

With regards to the UK public sector, I would suggest that you are not comparing apples with apples. Maybe we should look at the Westminster civil servants and salaries over £100k as percentage of workforce and compare that to their EU counterparts.

Im not sure what that link says as I cant open it, is there a part of the URL missing?

Im not here to defend the EU salary levels or any waste that takes place there. My point is really that:

1) the EU is no worse for waste or high wages than any national government, including the UK

2) The EU has become an easy whipping boy for UK politicians who want to deflect attention away from their own failings / create a bandwagon. The reality is that it is a relatively small organisation which spends a comparitively small sum of money. By far most big public spending, high salaries and immigration to the UK is down to the UK government, not the EU.

tbh I doubt you understand how the EU works. Thats no criticism of you, more than 90% of people in the UK dont - I'd survived 45 years without knowing until I had to learn for my current job.

 

The EU isnt undemocratic, its just complex. Its complex because the member states designed it that way - every state wants a say in all aspects of the EU. Imagine trying to run any other members club that way.

Im not sure what that link says as I cant open it, is there a part of the URL missing?

 

Im not here to defend the EU salary levels or any waste that takes place there. My point is really that:

1) the EU is no worse for waste or high wages than any national government, including the UK

2) The EU has become an easy whipping boy for UK politicians who want to deflect attention away from their own failings. The reality is that it is a small organisation which spends a comparitively small sum of money in the greater scheme of things. Most big public sectors salaries and immigration to the UK is down to the UK government, not the EU.

I thought your point was that the EU isn't undemocratic, and that anyone that didn't know that was just too ignorant (temporary or otherwise) to understand how the EU works.

...

9000 on more than £100k pa seems a lot to me, especially considering our country functioned perfectly well before the EU became so big.

I'm not against immigration but it needs to be controlled, the fact that loads are coming in from China etc means we should let less in from the EU in my opinion.

In any case, there is no reason why we shouldn't have a referendum so we can decide for ourselves. There is no motivation for the big parties to get their noses out the trough and there is no motivation for the Euro MPs to vote themselves out of a job.

I thought your point was that the EU isn't undemocratic, and that anyone that didn't know that was just too ignorant (temporary or otherwise) to understand how the EU works.

Err they are two separate replies to two separate posters making two separate posts - hence the different points. Not tricky.

Err they are two separate replies to two separate posters making two separate posts - hence the different points. Not tricky.

Your post stands alone, even explaining your rationale (with a great deal of theory and omission, I might add).

You claim the EU isn't undemocratic, yet have no answer for the people of Greece, Spain or any other country that might have its democracy suspended at the behest of the EU Commission.

Voters have no direct say on the executive branch of the EU. Most EU legislation is enacted via statutory instrument and not even debated in Parliament. These are big examples of the undemocratic EU at work that your "EU For People More Ignorant than Tim 101" post doesn't really address.

9000 on more than £100k pa seems a lot to me, especially considering our country functioned perfectly well before the EU became so big.

 

I'm not against immigration but it needs to be controlled, the fact that loads are coming in from China etc means we should let less in from the EU in my opinion.

 

In any case, there is no reason why we shouldn't have a referendum so we can decide for ourselves. There is no motivation for the big parties to get their noses out the trough and there is no motivation for the Euro MPs to vote themselves out of a job.

I dont disagree with the referendum. My concern is just that we've had so many years of EU bashing for domestic politics purposes that it wont really be a balanced debate.

re the salaries, Cameron reckons there were 4,000 staff earning over £80,000 pa in 2012.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financialcrisis/9620666/David-Cameron-threatens-to-veto-EU-budget-unless-Brussels-sacks-staff.html

UKIP's plan to quit the EU would do little to curb immigration

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/11189366/Would-Ukips-plan-to-quit-the-EU-really-cut-immigration.html

Link seemed to work for me

It was from the euro parliament site and was called

WORKING DOCUMENT on the reform of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Communities and the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of those Communities

Link seemed to work for me

 

It was from the euro parliament site and was called

 

WORKING DOCUMENT on the reform of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Communities and the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of those Communities

My pc says it doesnt have a programme to open that kind of file, which is odd. What are the main points?

Im not sure what that link says as I cant open it, is there a part of the URL missing?

 

Im not here to defend the EU salary levels or any waste that takes place there. My point is really that:

1) the EU is no worse for waste or high wages than any national government, including the UK

2) The EU has become an easy whipping boy for UK politicians who want to deflect attention away from their own failings / create a bandwagon. The reality is that it is a relatively small organisation which spends a comparitively small sum of money. By far most big public spending, high salaries and immigration to the UK is down to the UK government, not the EU.

It works on my phone. Just a pdf file.

My pc says it doesnt have a programme to open that kind of file, which is odd. What are the main points?

Gives a list of salary by grade and the number of positions in that grade

Gives a list of salary by grade and the number of positions in that grade

Okay got it now. tbh I don't see a particular problem with it. I guess the assumption is that because EU employees are on an administrative grade then everybody is an adminstrating bureaucrat. That isnt accurate. For example people on the AD7 grade are a translator; interpreter; economist; lawyer; medical officer; veterinary inspector; scientist; researcher; financial officer or auditor and earn on the scale £50,000-56,700pa.

How much do you think it is reasonable for qualified experienced professionals to earn? http://s000.tinyupload.com/?file_id=52648744502885387595

Okay got it now. I don't see a particular problem with it. I guess the assumption is that because EU employees are on an administrative grade then everybody is an adminstrating bureaucrat. That isnt accurate. For example people on the AD7 grade are a translator; interpreter; economist; lawyer; medical officer; veterinary inspector; scientist; researcher;

financial officer or auditor and earn on the scale £50,000-56,700pa. How much do you think it is reasonable for qualified experienced professionals to earn? http://s000.tinyupload.com/?file_id=52648744502885387595

I don't think the issue is how much a lawyer or scientist gets paid, it's more like just how many do they actually need. In my experience large organisations tend to create jobs, and those people then create work which then requires more people to do it. Worse still, due to general poor communications, work is being done that is no longer required - eg report that was useful three years ago that is now no longer used and no one thought to tell the poor sod who spends a week every month writing it.

I don't think the issue is how much a lawyer or scientist gets paid, it's more like just how many do they actually need. In my experience large organisations tend to create jobs, and those people then create work which then requires more people to do it. Worse still, due to general poor communications, work is being done that is no longer required - eg report that was useful three years ago that is now no longer used and no one thought to tell the poor sod who spends a week every month writing it.

Ive no idea how many is the 'right' number. I met Maria Damanaki the previous Fisheries commissioner on a number of occasions and her office staff consisted of 8 people. Your doc says the EC employs 45,000 people. The UK Civil Service employs 438,000 (2013) and the public sector as a whole 5.7m. So my point remains that whilst there may be instances of waste or overpaying in the EU, compared with the size and scale of national bureacracies its absolutely tiny. Attempts by domestic politicians to to discredit the EU by bashing it with that stick are bogus.

Farage vs Frankie Boyle

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/10/29/frankie-boyle-nigel-farage-andrew-lawrence-_n_6066256.html?1414574643

Well its not every day you see a c*** calling another c***, a c***.

Out of all the c***s out there Frankie Boyle is probably the biggest c*** of all.

Well its not every day you see a c*** calling another c***, a c***.

 

Out of all the c***s out there Frankie Boyle is probably the biggest c*** of all.

He didn't call him a c**t though. Just said other people did

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/10/29/britain-first-ukip_n_6066498.html?1414580069

Saw Tariq Ali give a speech at a Left Unity meeting.

He thinks France is coming to the end of its 1789 ideals, largely because of the rise of the National Front there.

He didn't call him a c**t though. Just said other people did

Ok, for the sake of accuracy

Well it not every day you see a c*** telling a c*** that some other c***s think he is a c***

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/10/29/britain-first-ukip_n_6066498.html?1414580069

Good grief. The Britain First mob look like a right bunch of charlies. Uniforms, seriously?

Good grief. The Britain First mob look like a right bunch of charlies. Uniforms, seriously?

No need to go that far. I would have thought just wearing same-colour shirts would be enough.

This is what I'd wear to a job interview

https://www.facebook.com/britainfirstgb/photos/a.347167375428530.1073741829.300455573433044/527056290772970/

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/10/29/britain-first-ukip_n_6066498.html?1414580069

God, it's laughable. Well it would be if it wasn't so sad.

Ok, for the sake of accuracy

 

Well it not every day you see a c*** telling a c*** that some other c***s think he is a c***

Good man!

tbh I doubt you understand how the EU works. Thats no criticism of you, more than 90% of people in the UK dont - I'd survived 45 years without knowing until I had to learn for my current job.

 

The EU isnt undemocratic, its just complex. Its complex because the member states designed it that way - every state wants a say in all aspects of the EU. Imagine trying to run any other members club that way.

 

The EU is governed by a tripartite (three 'powers') system.

 

1. The European Commission. Every member country gets one commissioner who is nominated by the elected national government. The bigger the country the bigger portfolio you get. So Latvia for example gets 'Social Dialogue' whilst Britain gets responsibility for Financial Services and Capital markets across Europe. The Commission cannot pass laws, it can only propose them.

2. European Parliament. The Parliament is elected through votes in each country. It approves or rejects laws and budgets proposed by the commission and can refuse or sack under performing commissioners. It jointly shares the power to make decisions with the Council of Ministers

3. Council of Ministers. The Council of Ministers is a grouping of ministers from each country which provides the accountability to national parliaments. It must approve all EU laws and co-ordinates national policy and actions.

 

The other misunderstanding is that the EU is some vast bureacracy. It isnt, across Europe it employs 33,000 people. By contrast 5,700,000 work in the public sector in the UK alone. The EU budget is 1.05% of Gross National Income - ie Westminster spends 98.95% of all taxes raised in UK.

It is an organisation that is nigh on impossible to change with your vote.

It seems we are heading out of the EU

The German leader has stated that she will withdraw support for UK membership if we try to negotiate immigration rules and that the UK is fast approaching the point of no return

Farage is at it again:

http://www.newsbiscuit.com/2014/11/02/farage-suggests-casual-racism-fridays-for-uk-businesses/

More research on effects of immigration

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29910497

More research on effects of immigration

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29910497

But but, Nigel said. But, the immigrants, they are coming here and sponging, and taking all our jobs. And they take all our benefits. It must be true, Nick Griffin, Nigel Farage & Paul the Patriot told me so.

This country's gone to the dogs, hasn't it.

I don't know what to think anymore.

More research on effects of immigration

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29910497

The report produced by UCL, that receive sizeable subsidies from the EU?

Missing the point as to why Ukip are popular and relevant anyway.

Playing devil's advocate, the flipside of that article (immigrants pay more into the tax system than they take out) involves wage pressure and fewer opportunities for those already resident. Those are issues that UKIP is already capitalising on.

As I'm sure I've said before, it's a bloody shame that UKIP seem to be the only committed anti-EU party capable of making a difference to the political landscape. Despite Nigel's highly successful posturing, I don't really buy him as a revolutionary in the sense that he's any different from the Tories he sprang from.

In another sense though, what he's suggesting is quite revolutionary. An exit from the EU is effectively a change of sovereignty. I know that technically, we still implement the laws through our own statute books, but much of that comes via EU directives and is implemented by statutory instrument, probably because Parliament neither has the time to debate it nor the power to overturn it without violating our treaty agreements.

Ultimately, it's a choice about who gets to govern and the limits of sovereignty. The shame of it is that it's a toss up between the devil and the deep blue sea.

The report produced by UCL, that receive sizeable subsidies from the EU?

 

Missing the point as to why Ukip are popular and relevant anyway.

Meaning they should change the facts to suit your opinions?

Do you think they should have suppressed these facts because UKIP has some degree of popularity?

And what 'subsidies' are these? (Do you mean 'subsidies'?)

Meaning they should change the facts to suit your opinions?

 

Do you think they should have suppressed these facts because UKIP has some degree of popularity?

 

And what 'subsidies' are these? (Do you mean 'subsidies'?)

What are your thoughts on it's figures on non-EU migrants contribution to our economy?

These reports are unbelievably simplistic. They make no allowance for the use of capital assets. All immigrants need to be fed, housed and watered.They need beds, food, fresh water, sewers, gas, electricity, transport, doctors, dentists, schools, the list is endless.

I agree that immigrants have done a lot of positive things. The report doesn't address the basic unfairness of someone being able to move here purely because they are from Europe whilst others such as new Zealanders miss out.

i can,t wait for us to leave and be on our own outside our biggest market and renegotiate all our trade deals around the world then i woke up from fantasy islandthe reality is the likely outcome of the next election is another coalition or a labour win based on our split between the two conservative party's (ukip). looks like a repeat of the 1980s when the labour vote was split with the sdp. unfortunately we four of the most useless party leaders i,ve seen in my lifetime. i hate the politics of fear and negativity they all preach.

I agree that immigrants have done a lot of positive things. The report doesn't address the basic unfairness of someone being able to move here purely because they are from Europe whilst others such as new Zealanders miss out.

got to agree with you there but to have a single European market, you got to have freedom of movement and common rules and standards or it does not work with each country cherry picking the bits they like.

Why does having a free trade agreement mean we have to accept freedom of movement?

Why does having a free trade agreement mean we have to accept freedom of movement?

Freedom of movement facilitates freedom of trade. An EU citizen driving a lorry can take a load point-to-point anywhere within the Union. Back in the day, that would have involved travel permits, border controls and checkpoints - these days it mostly doesn't.

Freedom of movement facilitates freedom of trade. An EU citizen driving a lorry can take a load point-to-point anywhere within the Union. Back in the day, that would have involved travel permits, border controls and checkpoints - these days it mostly doesn't.

That's a very specific job and no reason why for a job like that there can't be agreements to continue to make their job easier. It's doesn't have to be as black and white as people suggest.

i can,t wait for us to leave and be on our own outside our biggest market and renegotiate all our trade deals around the world then i woke up from fantasy islandthe reality is the likely outcome of the next election is another coalition or a labour win based on our split between the two conservative party's (ukip). looks like a repeat of the 1980s when the labour vote was split with the sdp. unfortunately we four of the most useless party leaders i,ve seen in my lifetime. i hate the politics of fear and negativity they all preach.

How did we survive before? How are Norway and Switzerland able to be successful still?

got to agree with you there but to have a single European market, you got to have freedom of movement and common rules and standards or it does not work with each country cherry picking the bits they like.

We already 'cherry pick' some bits we don't like - we don't have the Euro. Why are we able to trade successfully with other parts of the world without having to completely open our borders to them?

These reports are unbelievably simplistic. They make no allowance for the use of capital assets. All immigrants need to be fed, housed and watered.They need beds, food, fresh water, sewers, gas, electricity, transport, doctors, dentists, schools, the list is endless.

When you say 'these reports' you presumably mean 'this report' - which I take for code translated: as you haven't read it. And you're fabulating to suit your inner ostrich.

As for the idea that the report 'makes no allowance' for capital assets and other costs, one section of the report deals with contributions from non-EU migrants, which make significant demands on public services. Between 1995 and 2011 costing taxpayers £118 billion. Even when balanced against their contribution, they still took out more than they 'paid in' for every year during that period.

Three-quarters of the net contribution - the figure widely reported - is from 'old EU' migrants (France, Italy, Germany, etc).

Presumably the knee jerkers have kneed themselves in the head in their dim-witted rush to accuse the authors of bias, because there's plenty of good statistical information in the report to inform both sides of the debate.

I agree that immigrants have done a lot of positive things. The report doesn't address the basic unfairness of someone being able to move here purely because they are from Europe whilst others such as new Zealanders miss out.

I love the mental gymnastics UKIPpers go through with this argument. We're not racist, you're the racists!!

That's a very specific job and no reason why for a job like that there can't be agreements to continue to make their job easier. It's doesn't have to be as black and white as people suggest.

Its also not true. Britain isnt part of the Schengen Agreement, hence why the UK still has border controls and passport checks. The biggest source of immigrants to the UK are China, India, the US, Australia and Poland. Only one of those is in the EU.

I love the mental gymnastics UKIPpers go through with this argument. We're not racist, you're the racists!!

This is the idiocy I'm talking about. I'm not a 'ukipper' I voted for the tories last time and labour before that. It's your pathetic attitude that makes people disillusioned with politics in general. There is no mental gymnastics involved. I can't speak for ukip but I want fairness with immigration. If we need a profession then we should be welcoming to anyone from around the world who can contribute to this country not just anyone who fancies it from Europe.

Its also not true. Britain isnt part of the Schengen Agreement, hence why the UK still has border controls and passport checks. The biggest source of immigrants to the UK are China, India, the US, Australia and Poland. Only one of those is in the EU.

But all the others are subject to extremely strict criteria yet no one from Europe is. How is that fair just because you happen to be born outside of Europe?

But all the others are subject to extremely strict criteria yet no one from Europe is. How is that fair just because you happen to be born outside of Europe?

Because its a reciprocal agreement. We go there freely they come here. The US and Australia have strict immigration criteria, so do we.