|
|
Post by starkiller on Apr 11, 2016 9:27:32 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by desman2 on Apr 11, 2016 9:51:59 GMT
send it back to10 downing street
|
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Apr 11, 2016 10:16:49 GMT
Harold Wilson did the same thing in 1975 when Labour were hanging on to power and there was in in-out vote didn't he?
The argument goes that the Government has a position on this and have the right/responsibility to put it to the electorate.
But I agree it is very dodgy and I am opposed to it.
What people really need is more information and facts on which to make a decision. But the trouble with that is no one can agree on any of the facts.
What to do...?
|
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Apr 11, 2016 10:37:02 GMT
Harold Wilson did the same thing in 1975 when Labour were hanging on to power and there was in in-out vote didn't he? The argument goes that the Government has a position on this and have the right/responsibility to put it to the electorate. But I agree it is very dodgy and I am opposed to it. What people really need is more information and facts on which to make a decision. But the trouble with that is no one can agree on any of the facts. What to do...? I agree with what you are saying Gods. I don't think that there will be 'facts' as such, either way it could be argued that we are going into the unknown. It depends upon your belief about where you think the EU is heading and what might be possible if we revert to being a proper country in a changing world. A bit like entering the second world war, when we don't know the outcome (in terms of facts) For me a referendum should be about the Government LISTENING to the electorate for once on a major issue which cuts across usual Government and Party lines. I think that it is a disgrace is immoral and should be illegal for them to issue these letters |
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Apr 11, 2016 10:56:43 GMT
Harold Wilson did the same thing in 1975 when Labour were hanging on to power and there was in in-out vote didn't he? The argument goes that the Government has a position on this and have the right/responsibility to put it to the electorate. But I agree it is very dodgy and I am opposed to it. What people really need is more information and facts on which to make a decision. But the trouble with that is no one can agree on any of the facts. What to do...? I agree with what you are saying Gods. I don't think that there will be 'facts' as such, either way it could be argued that we are going into the unknown. It depends upon your belief about where you think the EU is heading and what might be possible if we revert to being a proper country in a changing world. A bit like entering the second world war, when we don't know the outcome (in terms of facts) For me a referendum should be about the Government LISTENING to the electorate for once on a major issue which cuts across usual Government and Party lines. I think that it is a disgrace is immoral and should be illegal for them to issue these letters That is very true, it is probably an emotional decision with a splash of intuition for many or even most people. And since you can always find an economist who has a model which tells you whatever you like the financial argument is unwinnable. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 11, 2016 12:49:46 GMT
In the bin with the takeaway flyers.
|
|
|
|
Post by trickydicky73 on Apr 11, 2016 13:01:30 GMT
I got mine this morning. It's just made me more determined to vote "OUT", to be honest. So much for the fair debate we were promised. As someone else said this type of thing happened in 1975, too, when the media pushed for us to stay in and ridiculed people who wanted to leave. It stank then, and it stinks, now. |
|
|
|
Post by harryburrows on Apr 11, 2016 14:09:51 GMT
The problem being that there are no absolute truths in the debate . Two opposing sides with intelligent credible and persuasive arguments in support of their views . The outcome whatever that is will have some welcome consequences and some nasty surprises . It's up to the government to respect the vote and make the best of it . The potential of forcing a vote for Scottish independence may have an effect on the outcome
|
|
|
|
Post by desman2 on Apr 11, 2016 14:11:11 GMT
Heres where to send it. They pay the postage.
Joanna George Freepost RSBB-XRZT-ZTXE The Conservative Party Foundation 30 Millbank London SW1P 4DP
|
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Apr 11, 2016 14:24:27 GMT
Heres where to send it. They pay the postage. Joanna George Freepost RSBB-XRZT-ZTXE The Conservative Party Foundation 30 Millbank London SW1P 4DP To be fair more than half the house support it. I have not heard jezza, sturgeon or the shadow chancellor say anything against it. And these three are the first rent a quote merchants when it comes to anti government. I'd send mine to jezza |
|
|
|
Post by starkiller on Apr 11, 2016 15:02:43 GMT
Heres where to send it. They pay the postage. Joanna George Freepost RSBB-XRZT-ZTXE The Conservative Party Foundation 30 Millbank London SW1P 4DP To be fair more than half the house support it. I have not heard jezza, sturgeon or the shadow chancellor say anything against it. And these three are the first rent a quote merchants when it comes to anti government. I'd send mine to jezza Unfortunately, he lost any active backing I may have given him when he supported this EU monster. The whole thing stinks and successive governments and opposition have given us this appalling dictatorship. |
|
|
|
Post by blurtonboy on Apr 11, 2016 15:08:10 GMT
To be fair more than half the house support it. I have not heard jezza, sturgeon or the shadow chancellor say anything against it. And these three are the first rent a quote merchants when it comes to anti government. I'd send mine to jezza Unfortunately, he lost any active backing I may have given him when he supported this EU monster. The whole thing stinks and successive governments and opposition have given us this appalling dictatorship. Do you ever have a happy outlook in life, or are you the Benjaminbiscuit political correspondent? |
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Apr 11, 2016 15:18:45 GMT
A left wing perspective :
It’s operation desperation
Apr
2016
Friday 8th
posted by Morning Star in Editorial
DAVID CAMERON’S decision to spend £9.3 million of public funds on misrepresenting the truth about the European Union is a scandal but also an admission of weakness.
Were he not feeling that the tide is turning against his side of the argument, Cameron wouldn’t have needed to act like this.
The Prime Minister claims to be responding to public demands for more information, but his one-sided pamphlet is an attempt to swamp growing opposition to an undemocratic and unaccountable burgeoning EU superstate with a tsunami of partisan propaganda.
Cameron’s pamphlet rehashes Project Fear, suggesting that three million jobs in companies trading with other EU states are at risk, even though Britain has a trade deficit with the EU, making nonsense of the idea that Brussels would cut off trade relations.
It repeats the wild assertion that negotiating Britain’s withdrawal could take a decade.
Why? It is in the interests of Britain and the remainder of the EU to come to a speedy accord to minimise economic uncertainty.
So who would have a bargaining mandate of stringing out talks for 10 years to cause trading chaos?
When Cameron stoops to suggesting that air fares for workers’ annual holidays in the sun could rise if Britain leaves the EU, he really is desperate.
The EU doesn’t set air fares. Airlines do. If they raise prices to outlandish levels, other companies will undercut them.
Cameron has to resort to childish nonsense to justify ongoing EU membership because previous claims that it would bring working people higher employment levels, better pay, pensions and working conditions and greater security have turned to rust.
No country was more pro-EU dream than the Netherlands. It was a model European country in every aspect.
But things have changed. Living conditions have deteriorated. Insecurity has increased. The “social Europe” gains proclaimed in the 1980s have been whittled away.
The dream has turned sour for the Dutch, so they have rejected the EU free trade deal with Ukraine.
The EU elite is intent on constant expansion of the bloc’s borders, disregarding its failure to harmonise relations in the wake of previous headlong enlargement.
Brussels turns a blind eye to rampant corruption in Kiev, the undemocratic banning of the Communist Party and the role of neonazi armed militias.
Why should the EU stance be surprising? It was up to its neck in instigating the Maidan 2014 coup d’etat, rejecting Ukraine’s right to have relations with both the EU and Russia and demanding all or nothing.
Greece stands today as a constant reminder that the EU prioritises the interests of private banks over working people’s standards of life.
The EU Commission and European Central Bank refused all compromises offered by Athens, steamrollering “bailout” agreements designed to rescue foreign banks over the protests of Greek working people.
Even the IMF protested that successive bailouts have left Greece with unpayable debt levels that necessitate yet more loans and associated assaults on workers’ jobs, salaries, pensions, and public services.
The same leaders who crucify the Greek people are happy to force down wages and conditions in other EU countries by means of the “posted worker” directive and case law handed down by the European Court of Justice.
The Dutch, who drank deep at the EU fountain of solidarity and internationalism, have discovered the hard way that they have been misled and they have rebelled.
In the true spirit of EU disdain for democracy, their vote will probably be ignored, emphasising the need for voters in Britain not to be seduced by Cameron’s £9.3m dodgy dossier.
|
|
|
|
Post by wizzardofdribble on Apr 11, 2016 15:20:21 GMT
Harold Wilson did the same thing in 1975 when Labour were hanging on to power and there was in in-out vote didn't he? The argument goes that the Government has a position on this and have the right/responsibility to put it to the electorate. But I agree it is very dodgy and I am opposed to it. What people really need is more information and facts on which to make a decision. But the trouble with that is no one can agree on any of the facts. What to do...? 'What people really need is more information' Eh? Most people I know are absolutely sick and tired of the constant banging on about Europe. Europe is an issue of the Political Right just as Clause 4 was an issue of the Left. That's why most people aren't really very interested. The EE Board is much more Right Wing than the general public.. that's why it dominates these threads. But when you get out into the real world most people are more interested in what they are having for tea. The last thing they want is any.more information. |
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Apr 11, 2016 15:33:14 GMT
Harold Wilson did the same thing in 1975 when Labour were hanging on to power and there was in in-out vote didn't he? The argument goes that the Government has a position on this and have the right/responsibility to put it to the electorate. But I agree it is very dodgy and I am opposed to it. What people really need is more information and facts on which to make a decision. But the trouble with that is no one can agree on any of the facts. What to do...? 'What people really need is more information' Eh? Most people I know are absolutely sick and tired of the constant banging on about Europe. Europe is an issue of the Political Right just as Clause 4 was an issue of the Left. That's why most people aren't really very interested. The EE Board is much more Right Wing than the general public.. that's why it dominates these threads. But when you get out into the real world most people are more interested in what they are having for tea. The last thing they want is any.more information. I'm not sure about that, its not scientific but most people I have met have some opinion or another on the question of the EU and can at the same time also worry about what's for tea! |
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Apr 11, 2016 15:36:22 GMT
Harold Wilson did the same thing in 1975 when Labour were hanging on to power and there was in in-out vote didn't he? The argument goes that the Government has a position on this and have the right/responsibility to put it to the electorate. But I agree it is very dodgy and I am opposed to it. What people really need is more information and facts on which to make a decision. But the trouble with that is no one can agree on any of the facts. What to do...? 'What people really need is more information' Eh? Most people I know are absolutely sick and tired of the constant banging on about Europe. Europe is an issue of the Political Right just as Clause 4 was an issue of the Left. That's why most people aren't really very interested. The EE Board is much more Right Wing than the general public.. that's why it dominates these threads. But when you get out into the real world most people are more interested in what they are having for tea. The last thing they want is any.more information. Wizard, I don't know the political persuasion of most on the board but I am certain that the EU issue should be fundamental for left wingers if they believe in democracy and the vote for the working man ( or woman). You are right that most ordinary people are not bothered, and therein lies the problem. ....those who are bothered realise that membership of the EU affects the power struggle in society. The Labour party should be up in arms |
|
|
|
Post by starkiller on Apr 11, 2016 16:26:38 GMT
Unfortunately, he lost any active backing I may have given him when he supported this EU monster. The whole thing stinks and successive governments and opposition have given us this appalling dictatorship. Do you ever have a happy outlook in life, or are you the Benjaminbiscuit political correspondent? You don't have to be concerned about my happiness. But maybe next time, I'll run my posts past you to check. |
|
|
|
Post by harryburrows on Apr 11, 2016 17:12:45 GMT
Harold Wilson did the same thing in 1975 when Labour were hanging on to power and there was in in-out vote didn't he? The argument goes that the Government has a position on this and have the right/responsibility to put it to the electorate. But I agree it is very dodgy and I am opposed to it. What people really need is more information and facts on which to make a decision. But the trouble with that is no one can agree on any of the facts. What to do...? 'What people really need is more information' Eh? Most people I know are absolutely sick and tired of the constant banging on about Europe. Europe is an issue of the Political Right just as Clause 4 was an issue of the Left. That's why most people aren't really very interested. The EE Board is much more Right Wing than the general public.. that's why it dominates these threads. But when you get out into the real world most people are more interested in what they are having for tea. The last thing they want is any.more information. I think thats a bit cynical , most people realise it's a very important election , more so than any general election for at least a generation . Those people who are more interested in their tea probably won't cast a vote anyway . Not underestimating the importance of teatime though  |
|
|
|
Post by mumf on Apr 11, 2016 17:21:53 GMT
The problem being that there are no absolute truths in the debate . Two opposing sides with intelligent credible and persuasive arguments in support of their views . The outcome whatever that is will have some welcome consequences and some nasty surprises . It's up to the government to respect the vote and make the best of it . The potential of forcing a vote for Scottish independence may have an effect on the outcome The only thing that would persuade me to stay in the EU is if Linda Lusardi posed topless on the front of the leaflets and I am unanimous |
|
|
|
Post by mumf on Apr 11, 2016 17:27:46 GMT
'What people really need is more information' Eh? Most people I know are absolutely sick and tired of the constant banging on about Europe. Europe is an issue of the Political Right just as Clause 4 was an issue of the Left. That's why most people aren't really very interested. The EE Board is much more Right Wing than the general public.. that's why it dominates these threads. But when you get out into the real world most people are more interested in what they are having for tea. The last thing they want is any.more information. I think thats a bit cynical , most people realise it's a very important election , more so than any general election for at least a generation . Those people who are more interested in their tea probably won't cast a vote anyway . Not underestimating the importance of teatime though I think the turn out will be massive and people from all political persuasions will make the effort. If that happens then I think the "outs" may have it. |
|
|
|
Post by harryburrows on Apr 11, 2016 17:27:59 GMT
The problem being that there are no absolute truths in the debate . Two opposing sides with intelligent credible and persuasive arguments in support of their views . The outcome whatever that is will have some welcome consequences and some nasty surprises . It's up to the government to respect the vote and make the best of it . The potential of forcing a vote for Scottish independence may have an effect on the outcome The only thing that would persuade me to stay in the EU is if Linda Lusardi posed topless on the front of the leaflets and I am unanimous It would need to be a foolscap leaflet due to her droopy tits |
|
|
|
Post by Linx on Apr 11, 2016 20:05:09 GMT
Here is a a pro-Europe article, quite logically structured, from The Economist. Obviously a left wing magazine, but that's not a bad thing while the Right Wingers keep beating each other up about it. I found it quite useful in the way it clarified some of the economic arguments in nice and simple terms for thickies like me. www.city.ac.uk/news/2016/march/there-is-an-economic-argument-for-leaving-the-eu,-but-it-is-a-weak-one |
|
|
|
Post by Linx on Apr 11, 2016 20:13:59 GMT
From above. The link doesn't work, so I've copied it below. Not too long.
How do the EU’s origins relate to the Brexit debate?There is an economic argument for leaving the EU, but on balance I believe it is a weak one. The EU was designed by the six core states – France, West Germany, Belgium, Netherlands, Luxembourg and Italy – around a vision that was primarily French. The UK joined late and had to accept the structures that were already in place – this is why the French initially refused for many years to allow the UK to join.So unhappiness with the EU is to some degree to be expected. To most British people, its rules and governance structures are extremely alien and hence few understand or know much about it. Still, the UK derives benefits from membership.
Benefits of access to the European marketMore generally, economists tend to regard free trade as welfare enhancing, a result that features in Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations and later in the works of David Ricardo. Generally, the benefits of trade, greater efficiency through specialization are particularly large for the smaller economy, it captures more of the gains from trade.Hence the UK generally benefits from trading with the continent more than the continent as a whole benefits from trading with the UK. The continent provides ready markets for UK goods, and British consumers benefit from the lower prices and greater variety of goods available from Europe, more than Europeans gain from trading with the British.There are other benefits to membership, including the right to travel, live and work in other countries. Lots of British people retire to southern Europe, particularly to Spain, and it is not clear if that would still be as easy if the UK leaves.
What are the economic arguments against EU membership?Opponents of the EU point to its massive inefficiencies and the large amounts of money the UK pays to fund both the bureaucracy and to help the poorer parts of the EU. All of this is true and a serious problem.They also claim that in the event of Brexit, the UK can negotiate a superior deal with the EU that would give the country all the benefits without the costs. I believe that is unlikely. In fact, I think that in the event of Brexit, the EU will have an incentive to punish the UK and make sure the change is as disruptive as possible to serve as a warning to other countries that might also contemplate going down this path or want the benefits without the costs and constraints. Furthermore, opponents promise that the UK will be able to negotiate better trade deals with nations such as Canada, Australia and India on its own. Again, I believe this is very unlikely. The EU has much more bargaining power than the UK on its own and these countries have little need to resuscitate the old British Empire and its system of imperial preferences.
Are there broader strategic issues at stake? Federalists are right to point to the way the EU has so far successfully achieved the main goals of its founders; for the original impetus for creating the EU was strategic – it served as a mechanism for ending the rivalries between nations that led to two world wars, and as a liberal alternative to the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance (Comecon) that the USSR had imposed on its Eastern European satellites in 1949. It is, however, possible to love something to death. Federalists perhaps fail to realise that beyond a certain point, the effort to create an ever closer union, far from alleviating discord between nations has the potential to exacerbate them. Take the euro. Economists like me were critical of the common currency when it was introduced, but our warnings were largely ignored. Forcing different countries so very different from each, across an entire continent, to adhere to a single monetary policy creates the grounds for endless conflict. And if countries share a single currency they can no longer pursue independent fiscal policy either, hence the restrictions imposed by the Maastricht agreement. The inevitable result is that political leaders can now blame their EU partners for economic downturns, austerity and the migration crisis too. This also creates opportunities for nationalist demagogues.For these reasons and other, most of the British public were always skeptical of ever closer union and campaigners for Brexit will contend that recent events have proven them right. Yet recent events have also made the prospect of ever closer union highly unlikely. Like the UK, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Hungary, Poland and Sweden have opted to remain outside the eurozone and their people largely share the belief that European integration has gone as far as it should.
Furthermore, if at some point in the distant future, were there to be a renewed effort to turn the EU into something like a unified political entity, the UK will still enjoy the option of simply leaving then and there. Forcing the UK to remain inside a European superstate against its will would require a military invasion. The European Commission has 23,000 civil servants in its employ, but I doubt they will be scrambling off landing craft to assault the beaches of Kent anytime soon.
|
|
|
|
Post by mumf on Apr 11, 2016 22:21:12 GMT
Interesting all this isn't it ?
Perhaps we are all getting too excited over the issue . Let's assume we do vote "out" . What is this governments plans for the future with an open mandate to do whatever it sees fit once the shackles of our European bosses are cast aside . How are they likely to handle it all . . What limits if any are likely to be imposed on immigration for example . How long is this process likely to take . . .
There will be some major changes in law to accommodate these changes along with legislation for EU residents wanting to work here .
I'm basically asking the question of how it is all likely to pan out ?
How do you see this situation (hypothetically) going ?
|
|
|
|
Post by desman2 on Apr 11, 2016 22:23:19 GMT
I read today that the European commissioners pay a massive 16% tax on their 230,000 a year pay. And these twats believe in austerity.
|
|
|
|
Post by ukcstokie on Apr 12, 2016 0:27:01 GMT
Harold Wilson did the same thing in 1975 when Labour were hanging on to power and there was in in-out vote didn't he? The argument goes that the Government has a position on this and have the right/responsibility to put it to the electorate. But I agree it is very dodgy and I am opposed to it. What people really need is more information and facts on which to make a decision. But the trouble with that is no one can agree on any of the facts. What to do...? 'What people really need is more information' Eh? Most people I know are absolutely sick and tired of the constant banging on about Europe. Europe is an issue of the Political Right just as Clause 4 was an issue of the Left. That's why most people aren't really very interested. The EE Board is much more Right Wing than the general public.. that's why it dominates these threads. But when you get out into the real world most people are more interested in what they are having for tea. The last thing they want is any.more information. Try investigating TTIP. Then decide if the EU has our best intentions at heart. |
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Apr 12, 2016 6:54:24 GMT
I read today that the European commissioners pay a massive 16% tax on their 230,000 a year pay. And these twats believe in austerity. Some of the salaries, expenses and conditons are incredible Des, worth investigating in itself. 2010 figures, The EU institutions employ over 47 000 civil servants on salaries far above those that they would receive in their home countries in public service. The level is similar to that of civil servants in many member states’ embassies in Brussels and in other international organisations. COMMISSIONERS The basic salary of a Commissioner is € 20 666 per month. This is 12,5 % more than the highest civil servant in the EU. The five Vice-Presidents each earn 25 % more, this is € 22 963 in monthly basic salary. The President receives 38 % more, this is € 25,351 per month. Figures are from 1 July 2010. The salaries are NOT taxed in their member states. Instead, a low tax is paid to the EU. The salaries are multiplied by 1.15 to include a residence allowance at 15 % of the salaries. Commissioners also receive a family allowance, € 171 plus 2% of the basic salary and an entertainment allowance of € 607 per month. The Vice Presidents receive € 911 per month and the President € 1 418. For each child they receive € 373 and an additional education allowance, € 253. When a Commissioner starts in office, he/she receives two month extra pay. When leaving they receive one extra month salary plus a transitional allowance for 3 years. This amount is between 40 and 65 % of their last basic salary, depending on how many years they have served as Commissioners. After 5 year a Commissioner, receive 55 % of their salary for the first 3 years. Commissioners receive a daily allowance when they are travelling. They have 5 % more than the highest civil servants do. Former Commissioners receive a pension from the age of 65, also with the low EU tax. The pension is calculated as 4.275 % of the basic salary for each year up to a maximum of 70 % of the final basic salary. The pension can be paid from the age of 60 with a reduction to 70 %. Commissioners can have their EU pensions paid in addition to all national pensions. A pensioned Commissioner with a national pension as a MP or/and a MEP, a pension as minister and a private pension from a private job can accumulate all pensions with no reductions. Former Commissioners will therefore have net pensions much higher than the national prime ministers will. On the other hand, both salaries and pensions for Commissioners are lower than what is paid for the leaders of many banks and private companies. Here we don’t judge on what is reasonable – we only bring the facts to the public so that voters can judge on salaries for their public servants. en.euabc.com/word/814 |
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Apr 12, 2016 7:07:14 GMT
If we are looking at salaries , income and tax in the UK , as part of the EU , we should certainly look at this organisation, grossly inflated in terms of personnel, cost and influence. From the EU's own website. A gravy train: ec.europa.eu/civil_service/job/official/index_en.htmSalary & other benefits Below, you will find a summary of our main benefits. For precise details, you can consult our Staff Regulations. Salary Basic monthly Commission salaries range from around €2,300 per month for a newly recruited AST/SC 1 official to around €16,000 per month for a top level AD 16 official with over 4 years of seniority. Each grade is broken up into five seniority steps with corresponding salary increases. Basic salaries are adjusted annually in line with inflation and purchasing power in the EU countries. The complete salary table is available in the Staff Regulations (Article 66). The basic monthly salary is just the starting point. To know how much you will get, you then have to add the allowances you may be entitled to, minus social security contributions (pension, health and accident insurance) and other taxes (income tax and a special EU levy). You will find more details below. Allowances If you have left your home country to come and work for the European Commission, you are entitled to an expatriation allowance equivalent to 16% of your basic salary. Some family-related allowances are available to Commission officials according to their family situation. These include a household allowance, a dependant child allowance, an educational allowance and a pre-school allowance. These allowances can help to cover the costs of looking after a family while working for an international organisation. For more information, see the Staff Regulations (Articles 62 to 71 and Annex VII). Pension EU officials in service before 1 January 2014 shall be retired at 65, EU officials recruited after 1 January 2014 shall be retired at 66 but it is possible to take early retirement with a reduced pension from the age of 58, or to work up until the age of 67 or exceptionally, until the age of 70. Pensions are paid as a percentage of the final basic salary. Officials accumulate 1.8% pension rights every year and are entitled to a maximum pension of 70% of their final basic salary. For more details, see the Staff Regulations (Articles 77 to 84 and Annex VIII). Staff can apply to transfer the pension rights they already have from a previous job or as a self-employed person. Similarly, you can also transfer the pension rights you gain while working at the European Commission into another pension fund. For more information, see the Staff Regulations (Articles 11 and 12 of Annex VIII). Whilst working, your contribution to the pension scheme will correspond to 10,1% of your basic salary. Sickness insurance As a European Commission official, you and your family are entitled to benefit from the Joint Sickness Insurance Scheme of the European Communities, which covers medical expenses at a reimbursement rate of 80% for most kinds of treatment (subject to maximum limits). You are also covered by accident insurance and insurance against occupational diseases. The Joint Sickness Insurance Scheme is funded through a contribution of about 2% of the basic monthly salary from each Commission official. You are also required to undergo a preventive medical check-up every year. For more details, see the Staff Regulations (Articles 72 to 76). Taxes As a European civil servant, your salary is not subject to national income tax. Instead, salaries paid by the Commission to its officials are directly subject to a Community tax which is paid directly back into the EU's budget. This tax is levied progressively at a rate of between 8% and 45% of the taxable portion of your salary. An additional 'solidarity levy' is in place from 2014 to 2023 (see Article 66 of the Staff Regulations). Leave & absences Commission officials are entitled to annual leave of 24 working days. On top of this entitlement, you may also be granted leave for time spent traveling between your home country and the place where you work. In addition to annual leave, there are rules for special leave for marriage, moving house, death of relatives or serious illnesses, births, etc. In exceptional circumstances, you may also apply for unpaid leave on personal grounds. You will find more information in the Staff Regulations (Articles 57 to 61 and Annex V). Reconciling professional & personal life A range of measures are in place to help ensure that working for the Commission is conducive to a healthy professional, personal and family life. These measures focus on parental and compassionate leave, a solid infrastructure of childcare and schooling and modern working arrangements. Many of these measures were introduced or improved when the new Staff Regulations came into effect in May 2004. In particular, mothers are entitled to 20 weeks maternity leave and fathers 10 days paternity leave on the normal salary, while 6 months parental leave per child is available on a basic monthly allowance. For more information see the Staff Regulations (Articles 57 to 61 and Annexes IV bis and V). The Commission takes a holistic approach to all aspects of well-being at work: there are also many leisure, sports and cultural clubs open to Commission staff and their families, including athletics, dance, theatre, art and language exchange |
|
|
|
Post by The Drunken Communist on Apr 12, 2016 7:29:34 GMT
most people realise it's a very important election , more so than any general election for at least a generation Sadly not enough people do think this, they'll just stick to the mantra. The Tory voters will vote 'Stay' 'cos their Glorious Leader wants to stay & their Glorious Leader is never wrong about anything, ever. The 'Uni age' Labour voters are nearly as brainwashed as the Tory voters & will also vote 'Stay' 'cos they think the EU is a big pink fluffy cloud with Unicorns prancing around. So we're left hoping that there are enough older Labour voters & UKIP voters who can sway it towards 'Leave'... It'll nodoubt take a lot of the "I conna be arsed with voting" brigade to get off their arses & vote 'Leave' too. It all points towards us staying in, which then means the country will continue to go to the dogs, and we'll no doubt continue getting threads on this forum made by Tory voters blaming everything on Labour. |
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Apr 12, 2016 8:04:52 GMT
Possibly the wrong thread, but we have got on to salaries , dishonesty and manipulation of the system. What Mrs Kinnock did, of course, is perfectly legal. Whether it is honest and morally right? How many more are doing it? When I have visited the EU complex/village there is indeed a lovely atmosphere, all the beurocrats seem to be out in the sun enjoying their lot. Is this envy of successful people, an accusation made by some. I don't believe it is, just an observation of the hypocrisy of a system, while we are struggling in terms of the health service , schools, policing, housing transport etc and yet we think that it is okay to support this talking shop , just because it is actually invisible and remote to the ordinary person. I honestly believe that most of our citizens have absolutely no interest or concept of the set up , and even those that do would have a shock if they actually visited the place .....it is not one small building! (and I am just talking about Brussels not the ludicrous set up of having an equivalent set up in Strasbourg ) How-Kinnocks-enjoyed-astonishing-10m-ride-EU-gravy-train At present MEPs receive €298 (£270) each day they sign a register at the European Parliament. However, it is open to abuse and in 2004 Austrian MEP Hans-Peter Martin filmed MEPs turning up to sign in early in the morning, only to head straight to the airport without doing any work. Dr Martin, a former investigative journalist, recorded Lady Kinnock leaving the Parliament building within an hour of signing in on 26 occasions during his two-year investigation. From: www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1192894/Revealed-How-Kinnocks-enjoyed-astonishing-10m-ride-EU-gravy-train.html |
|
