BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴
Comments
-
But would that money have ever got spent in Cornwall, we all know the government's funds go to London and the SE right. Next it's the northern powerhouse, no room at the inn for the SW. With the EU funding projects can go direct to the EU and apply for the money.0
-
Also, I think it was Steve Peers that said prior to the referendum that it would be impossible to convert all EU law into UK law. This ended up being done with minimal effort.
I have no objection to lawyers not always seeing the easiest route. It happens all the time, but I do object to the overconfidence which misleads a lot of people.2 -
It would have been our choice where to spend our money.elbowloh said:But would that money have ever got spent in Cornwall, we all know the government's funds go to London and the SE right. Next it's the northern powerhouse, no room at the inn for the SW. With the EU funding projects can go direct to the EU and apply for the money.
2 -
Ultimately I guess this issue comes down to whether you trust the EU or our Govt more to distribute funds.ballysmate said:
It would have been our choice where to spend our money.elbowloh said:But would that money have ever got spent in Cornwall, we all know the government's funds go to London and the SE right. Next it's the northern powerhouse, no room at the inn for the SW. With the EU funding projects can go direct to the EU and apply for the money.
Actually scratch that, as the answer is too obvious.
For too many, it comes down to the warm fuzzy feeling that WE got to choose, without giving a rats arse what the decision actually was.- Genesis Croix de Fer
- Dolan Tuono0 -
Sure but you *want* material difference don’t you?Stevo_666 said:
OK. Divergence is possible. Look at the conditions above.rick_chasey said:
Correct me if I’m wrong but if divergence isn’t possible without sanctions than what is the point?Stevo_666 said:
I don't think so.rick_chasey said:
Basically this I think is the realityrick_chasey said:https://ukandeu.ac.uk/british-sovereignty-run-by-europe/
Some law professor looks at the deal from a divergence perspective.
The site claims independence in the Brexit issue so take your own view.
This article explains the limits on EU 'retaliation' pretty well:
https://telegraph.co.uk/business/2020/12/30/have-economic-legal-independence-now-must-loosen-eus-chokeholds/
Quote: "Brussels will have to prove its point before an independent panel before it can retaliate. Divergence must be “material” and based on evidence of damage suffered rather than “mere conjecture”. Sanctions must be proportional. “The mechanism is exceptionally restricted in its scope,” said Prof David Collins, a WTO specialist writing for Politeia.
The thresholds are high enough that the EU cannot lash out whenever Britain takes any step to make itself more competitive."
The article also reminds us of some of the upsides.
0 -
Some people on here always feel that the EU have a better idea of where to spend its contributions. But it all depends on your perspective.elbowloh said:But would that money have ever got spent in Cornwall, we all know the government's funds go to London and the SE right. Next it's the northern powerhouse, no room at the inn for the SW. With the EU funding projects can go direct to the EU and apply for the money.
Elbow thinks that the SE gets more than its share. He may or may not be right.
Imagine if you were a resident of rural Bulgaria and you saw the EU lavish money on the comparatively affluent Cornwall. Would you not have similar feelings of injustice?1 -
I am sure it was available to regions deemed to be poor as they are a % of national average. I am also sure that a lot of money got spent on projects of limited value.pangolin said:
Ultimately I guess this issue comes down to whether you trust the EU or our Govt more to distribute funds.ballysmate said:
It would have been our choice where to spend our money.elbowloh said:But would that money have ever got spent in Cornwall, we all know the government's funds go to London and the SE right. Next it's the northern powerhouse, no room at the inn for the SW. With the EU funding projects can go direct to the EU and apply for the money.
Actually scratch that, as the answer is too obvious.
For too many, it comes down to the warm fuzzy feeling that WE got to choose, without giving a rats censored what the decision actually was.
Not sure if you blame the person who proposes the idiot project or the person who agrees it.1 -
Maybe.TheBigBean said:Also, I think it was Steve Peers that said prior to the referendum that it would be impossible to convert all EU law into UK law. This ended up being done with minimal effort.
I have no objection to lawyers not always seeing the easiest route. It happens all the time, but I do object to the overconfidence which misleads a lot of people.
But that must in fairness apply to the analysis of Star Command too?
I'm sure it'll be grand. It's got a full 5 hours of parliamentary scrutiny.
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
As I said to Elbowpangolin said:
Ultimately I guess this issue comes down to whether you trust the EU or our Govt more to distribute funds.ballysmate said:
It would have been our choice where to spend our money.elbowloh said:But would that money have ever got spent in Cornwall, we all know the government's funds go to London and the SE right. Next it's the northern powerhouse, no room at the inn for the SW. With the EU funding projects can go direct to the EU and apply for the money.
Actually scratch that, as the answer is too obvious.
For too many, it comes down to the warm fuzzy feeling that WE got to choose, without giving a rats censored what the decision actually was.
Some people on here always feel that the EU have a better idea of where to spend its contributions. But it all depends on your perspective.
Elbow thinks that the SE gets more than its share. He may or may not be right.
Imagine if you were a resident of rural Bulgaria and you saw the EU lavish money on the comparatively affluent Cornwall. Would you not have similar feelings of injustice?0 -
I assume Christopher Chope MP was content that this bill got enough scrutiny.
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
Honestly thought you of all people wouldn’t go down the politics of envy route.ballysmate said:
As I said to Elbowpangolin said:
Ultimately I guess this issue comes down to whether you trust the EU or our Govt more to distribute funds.ballysmate said:
It would have been our choice where to spend our money.elbowloh said:But would that money have ever got spent in Cornwall, we all know the government's funds go to London and the SE right. Next it's the northern powerhouse, no room at the inn for the SW. With the EU funding projects can go direct to the EU and apply for the money.
Actually scratch that, as the answer is too obvious.
For too many, it comes down to the warm fuzzy feeling that WE got to choose, without giving a rats censored what the decision actually was.
Some people on here always feel that the EU have a better idea of where to spend its contributions. But it all depends on your perspective.
Elbow thinks that the SE gets more than its share. He may or may not be right.
Imagine if you were a resident of rural Bulgaria and you saw the EU lavish money on the comparatively affluent Cornwall. Would you not have similar feelings of injustice?0 -
If it was cup a lady's skirt then that would be fine by him.tailwindhome said:I assume Christopher Chope MP was content that this bill got enough scrutiny.
0 -
We were a net contributor but I don't think Bulgaria were / are.ballysmate said:
As I said to Elbowpangolin said:
Ultimately I guess this issue comes down to whether you trust the EU or our Govt more to distribute funds.ballysmate said:
It would have been our choice where to spend our money.elbowloh said:But would that money have ever got spent in Cornwall, we all know the government's funds go to London and the SE right. Next it's the northern powerhouse, no room at the inn for the SW. With the EU funding projects can go direct to the EU and apply for the money.
Actually scratch that, as the answer is too obvious.
For too many, it comes down to the warm fuzzy feeling that WE got to choose, without giving a rats censored what the decision actually was.
Some people on here always feel that the EU have a better idea of where to spend its contributions. But it all depends on your perspective.
Elbow thinks that the SE gets more than its share. He may or may not be right.
Imagine if you were a resident of rural Bulgaria and you saw the EU lavish money on the comparatively affluent Cornwall. Would you not have similar feelings of injustice?
2018 figures for Bulgaria:
Total EU spend in Bulgaria – € 2.169 billion
(equivalent to 3.91% of the Bulgarian economy)
Total contribution to EU budget – € 0.487 billion
(equivalent to 0.88% of the Bulgarian economy)
So I reject your argument (although of course they can 'feel' however they want) and I'll add that you won't find a Brexiteer anywhere who voted because they were worried rural Bulgarians were getting a rough deal.- Genesis Croix de Fer
- Dolan Tuono0 -
A lady would not wear a skirt short enough to facilitate photography so the wearer would be well up for it or would have dressed appropriatelydarkhairedlord said:
If it was cup a lady's skirt then that would be fine by him.tailwindhome said:I assume Christopher Chope MP was content that this bill got enough scrutiny.
0 -
You're putting words into my mouth Bally. What i implied was that the SE is believed to get more than its fair share (it's where I live and you see that claim almost every day. What I said was that a project has an opportunity to apply for and get funds to their local areas. Not Bulgaria, but I have had dealings with people in rural Romania who have applied for and got funding for wildlife conservation projects in their areas.ballysmate said:
Some people on here always feel that the EU have a better idea of where to spend its contributions. But it all depends on your perspective.elbowloh said:But would that money have ever got spent in Cornwall, we all know the government's funds go to London and the SE right. Next it's the northern powerhouse, no room at the inn for the SW. With the EU funding projects can go direct to the EU and apply for the money.
Elbow thinks that the SE gets more than its share. He may or may not be right.
Imagine if you were a resident of rural Bulgaria and you saw the EU lavish money on the comparatively affluent Cornwall. Would you not have similar feelings of injustice?0 -
rick_chasey said:
Honestly thought you of all people wouldn’t go down the politics of envy route.ballysmate said:
As I said to Elbowpangolin said:
Ultimately I guess this issue comes down to whether you trust the EU or our Govt more to distribute funds.ballysmate said:
It would have been our choice where to spend our money.elbowloh said:But would that money have ever got spent in Cornwall, we all know the government's funds go to London and the SE right. Next it's the northern powerhouse, no room at the inn for the SW. With the EU funding projects can go direct to the EU and apply for the money.
Actually scratch that, as the answer is too obvious.
For too many, it comes down to the warm fuzzy feeling that WE got to choose, without giving a rats censored what the decision actually was.
Some people on here always feel that the EU have a better idea of where to spend its contributions. But it all depends on your perspective.
Elbow thinks that the SE gets more than its share. He may or may not be right.
Imagine if you were a resident of rural Bulgaria and you saw the EU lavish money on the comparatively affluent Cornwall. Would you not have similar feelings of injustice?
Just pointing out that the larger the area, the more chance there is of a region being in more need than yours and thereby more deserving.
Now it could be that regions of Bulgaria and Romania were more deserving of grants than Cornwall, but the EU made the political decision to allocate money to affluent Cornwall instead.
Do people still think the EU is better at targeting its resources according to need?0 -
Objective 2 funding was I think considered a genuine success and it was about helping rectify structural gaps between areas, so it was all about relative issues related to deindustrialisation rather than absolute wealth or poverty.ballysmate said:rick_chasey said:
Honestly thought you of all people wouldn’t go down the politics of envy route.ballysmate said:
As I said to Elbowpangolin said:
Ultimately I guess this issue comes down to whether you trust the EU or our Govt more to distribute funds.ballysmate said:
It would have been our choice where to spend our money.elbowloh said:But would that money have ever got spent in Cornwall, we all know the government's funds go to London and the SE right. Next it's the northern powerhouse, no room at the inn for the SW. With the EU funding projects can go direct to the EU and apply for the money.
Actually scratch that, as the answer is too obvious.
For too many, it comes down to the warm fuzzy feeling that WE got to choose, without giving a rats censored what the decision actually was.
Some people on here always feel that the EU have a better idea of where to spend its contributions. But it all depends on your perspective.
Elbow thinks that the SE gets more than its share. He may or may not be right.
Imagine if you were a resident of rural Bulgaria and you saw the EU lavish money on the comparatively affluent Cornwall. Would you not have similar feelings of injustice?
Just pointing out that the larger the area, the more chance there is of a region being in more need than yours and thereby more deserving.
Now it could be that regions of Bulgaria and Romania were more deserving of grants than Cornwall, but the EU made the political decision to allocate money to affluent Cornwall instead.
Do people still think the EU is better at targeting its resources according to need?
FWIW that is something the tories are not interested in ideologically so it was lucky for Cornwall that the EU took that seriously.
If only Westminster applied the same logic to their own spending, eh?0 -
Absolutely they are better. Can't believe it's up for discussion. Our current government's behaviour with funds is atrocious.ballysmate said:rick_chasey said:
Honestly thought you of all people wouldn’t go down the politics of envy route.ballysmate said:
As I said to Elbowpangolin said:
Ultimately I guess this issue comes down to whether you trust the EU or our Govt more to distribute funds.ballysmate said:
It would have been our choice where to spend our money.elbowloh said:But would that money have ever got spent in Cornwall, we all know the government's funds go to London and the SE right. Next it's the northern powerhouse, no room at the inn for the SW. With the EU funding projects can go direct to the EU and apply for the money.
Actually scratch that, as the answer is too obvious.
For too many, it comes down to the warm fuzzy feeling that WE got to choose, without giving a rats censored what the decision actually was.
Some people on here always feel that the EU have a better idea of where to spend its contributions. But it all depends on your perspective.
Elbow thinks that the SE gets more than its share. He may or may not be right.
Imagine if you were a resident of rural Bulgaria and you saw the EU lavish money on the comparatively affluent Cornwall. Would you not have similar feelings of injustice?
Just pointing out that the larger the area, the more chance there is of a region being in more need than yours and thereby more deserving.
Now it could be that regions of Bulgaria and Romania were more deserving of grants than Cornwall, but the EU made the political decision to allocate money to affluent Cornwall instead.
Do people still think the EU is better at targeting its resources according to need?- Genesis Croix de Fer
- Dolan Tuono0 -
Bulgaria is the second largest net recipient of EU funding. I think they probably do better than Cornwall out of the deal.ballysmate said:
As I said to Elbowpangolin said:
Ultimately I guess this issue comes down to whether you trust the EU or our Govt more to distribute funds.ballysmate said:
It would have been our choice where to spend our money.elbowloh said:But would that money have ever got spent in Cornwall, we all know the government's funds go to London and the SE right. Next it's the northern powerhouse, no room at the inn for the SW. With the EU funding projects can go direct to the EU and apply for the money.
Actually scratch that, as the answer is too obvious.
For too many, it comes down to the warm fuzzy feeling that WE got to choose, without giving a rats censored what the decision actually was.
Some people on here always feel that the EU have a better idea of where to spend its contributions. But it all depends on your perspective.
Elbow thinks that the SE gets more than its share. He may or may not be right.
Imagine if you were a resident of rural Bulgaria and you saw the EU lavish money on the comparatively affluent Cornwall. Would you not have similar feelings of injustice?1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
They did allocate vastly more money to Bulgaria. There is no 'instead'. Cornwall is not affluent by any measure.ballysmate said:rick_chasey said:
Honestly thought you of all people wouldn’t go down the politics of envy route.ballysmate said:
As I said to Elbowpangolin said:
Ultimately I guess this issue comes down to whether you trust the EU or our Govt more to distribute funds.ballysmate said:
It would have been our choice where to spend our money.elbowloh said:But would that money have ever got spent in Cornwall, we all know the government's funds go to London and the SE right. Next it's the northern powerhouse, no room at the inn for the SW. With the EU funding projects can go direct to the EU and apply for the money.
Actually scratch that, as the answer is too obvious.
For too many, it comes down to the warm fuzzy feeling that WE got to choose, without giving a rats censored what the decision actually was.
Some people on here always feel that the EU have a better idea of where to spend its contributions. But it all depends on your perspective.
Elbow thinks that the SE gets more than its share. He may or may not be right.
Imagine if you were a resident of rural Bulgaria and you saw the EU lavish money on the comparatively affluent Cornwall. Would you not have similar feelings of injustice?
Just pointing out that the larger the area, the more chance there is of a region being in more need than yours and thereby more deserving.
Now it could be that regions of Bulgaria and Romania were more deserving of grants than Cornwall, but the EU made the political decision to allocate money to affluent Cornwall instead.
Do people still think the EU is better at targeting its resources according to need?1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
We all know that Bulgaria is a net recipient and the UK was a net contributor, that isn't the point I was making. I was pointing out that the EU was equally adept at misallocating funds, dependant on your perspective.rjsterry said:
Bulgaria is the second largest net recipient of EU funding. I think they probably do better than Cornwall out of the deal.ballysmate said:
As I said to Elbowpangolin said:
Ultimately I guess this issue comes down to whether you trust the EU or our Govt more to distribute funds.ballysmate said:
It would have been our choice where to spend our money.elbowloh said:But would that money have ever got spent in Cornwall, we all know the government's funds go to London and the SE right. Next it's the northern powerhouse, no room at the inn for the SW. With the EU funding projects can go direct to the EU and apply for the money.
Actually scratch that, as the answer is too obvious.
For too many, it comes down to the warm fuzzy feeling that WE got to choose, without giving a rats censored what the decision actually was.
Some people on here always feel that the EU have a better idea of where to spend its contributions. But it all depends on your perspective.
Elbow thinks that the SE gets more than its share. He may or may not be right.
Imagine if you were a resident of rural Bulgaria and you saw the EU lavish money on the comparatively affluent Cornwall. Would you not have similar feelings of injustice?0 -
Pointing it out how?ballysmate said:
We all know that Bulgaria is a net recipient and the UK was a net contributor, that isn't the point I was making. I was pointing out that the EU was equally adept at misallocating funds, dependant on your perspective.rjsterry said:
Bulgaria is the second largest net recipient of EU funding. I think they probably do better than Cornwall out of the deal.ballysmate said:
As I said to Elbowpangolin said:
Ultimately I guess this issue comes down to whether you trust the EU or our Govt more to distribute funds.ballysmate said:
It would have been our choice where to spend our money.elbowloh said:But would that money have ever got spent in Cornwall, we all know the government's funds go to London and the SE right. Next it's the northern powerhouse, no room at the inn for the SW. With the EU funding projects can go direct to the EU and apply for the money.
Actually scratch that, as the answer is too obvious.
For too many, it comes down to the warm fuzzy feeling that WE got to choose, without giving a rats censored what the decision actually was.
Some people on here always feel that the EU have a better idea of where to spend its contributions. But it all depends on your perspective.
Elbow thinks that the SE gets more than its share. He may or may not be right.
Imagine if you were a resident of rural Bulgaria and you saw the EU lavish money on the comparatively affluent Cornwall. Would you not have similar feelings of injustice?- Genesis Croix de Fer
- Dolan Tuono0 -
Yes, but they have mutiple lawyers which helps.tailwindhome said:
Maybe.TheBigBean said:Also, I think it was Steve Peers that said prior to the referendum that it would be impossible to convert all EU law into UK law. This ended up being done with minimal effort.
I have no objection to lawyers not always seeing the easiest route. It happens all the time, but I do object to the overconfidence which misleads a lot of people.
But that must in fairness apply to the analysis of Star Command too?
I'm sure it'll be grand. It's got a full 5 hours of parliamentary scrutiny.
Incidentally, one part of the opinion shows the extent of the horsetrading. If the UK reduces the EU's fishing quota then the EU can hit back with tariffs on fish, terminating the interconnectors and cancelling some perk of batteries.
The Independent has reported this as the EU having the power to turn out the lights. Clearly not appreciating the size of the interconnectors and all the other unused capacity available.0 -
rjsterry said:
They did allocate vastly more money to Bulgaria. There is no 'instead'. Cornwall is not affluent by any measure.ballysmate said:rick_chasey said:
Honestly thought you of all people wouldn’t go down the politics of envy route.ballysmate said:
As I said to Elbowpangolin said:
Ultimately I guess this issue comes down to whether you trust the EU or our Govt more to distribute funds.ballysmate said:
It would have been our choice where to spend our money.elbowloh said:But would that money have ever got spent in Cornwall, we all know the government's funds go to London and the SE right. Next it's the northern powerhouse, no room at the inn for the SW. With the EU funding projects can go direct to the EU and apply for the money.
Actually scratch that, as the answer is too obvious.
For too many, it comes down to the warm fuzzy feeling that WE got to choose, without giving a rats censored what the decision actually was.
Some people on here always feel that the EU have a better idea of where to spend its contributions. But it all depends on your perspective.
Elbow thinks that the SE gets more than its share. He may or may not be right.
Imagine if you were a resident of rural Bulgaria and you saw the EU lavish money on the comparatively affluent Cornwall. Would you not have similar feelings of injustice?
Just pointing out that the larger the area, the more chance there is of a region being in more need than yours and thereby more deserving.
Now it could be that regions of Bulgaria and Romania were more deserving of grants than Cornwall, but the EU made the political decision to allocate money to affluent Cornwall instead.
Do people still think the EU is better at targeting its resources according to need?
I would think Cornwall is comparatively affluent to large areas of Bulgaria.0 -
Your perspective. If you live in a really poor region and you see money spent on a comparatively affluent area, you may feel aggrieved. Just as Elbow seems to feel when the UK spends money in the SE and London instead of other regions.pangolin said:
Pointing it out how?ballysmate said:
We all know that Bulgaria is a net recipient and the UK was a net contributor, that isn't the point I was making. I was pointing out that the EU was equally adept at misallocating funds, dependant on your perspective.rjsterry said:
Bulgaria is the second largest net recipient of EU funding. I think they probably do better than Cornwall out of the deal.ballysmate said:
As I said to Elbowpangolin said:
Ultimately I guess this issue comes down to whether you trust the EU or our Govt more to distribute funds.ballysmate said:
It would have been our choice where to spend our money.elbowloh said:But would that money have ever got spent in Cornwall, we all know the government's funds go to London and the SE right. Next it's the northern powerhouse, no room at the inn for the SW. With the EU funding projects can go direct to the EU and apply for the money.
Actually scratch that, as the answer is too obvious.
For too many, it comes down to the warm fuzzy feeling that WE got to choose, without giving a rats censored what the decision actually was.
Some people on here always feel that the EU have a better idea of where to spend its contributions. But it all depends on your perspective.
Elbow thinks that the SE gets more than its share. He may or may not be right.
Imagine if you were a resident of rural Bulgaria and you saw the EU lavish money on the comparatively affluent Cornwall. Would you not have similar feelings of injustice?0 -
I'm not pretending it's a perfect system. There will always be less than optimal outcomes for someone. I think it's about whether you think the overriding motives are good or not. I don't think our government's are good, particularly when it comes to handing out cash.ballysmate said:
Your perspective. If you live in a really poor region and you see money spent on a comparatively affluent area, you may feel aggrieved. Just as Elbow seems to feel when the UK spends money in the SE and London instead of other regions.pangolin said:
Pointing it out how?ballysmate said:
We all know that Bulgaria is a net recipient and the UK was a net contributor, that isn't the point I was making. I was pointing out that the EU was equally adept at misallocating funds, dependant on your perspective.rjsterry said:
Bulgaria is the second largest net recipient of EU funding. I think they probably do better than Cornwall out of the deal.ballysmate said:
As I said to Elbowpangolin said:
Ultimately I guess this issue comes down to whether you trust the EU or our Govt more to distribute funds.ballysmate said:
It would have been our choice where to spend our money.elbowloh said:But would that money have ever got spent in Cornwall, we all know the government's funds go to London and the SE right. Next it's the northern powerhouse, no room at the inn for the SW. With the EU funding projects can go direct to the EU and apply for the money.
Actually scratch that, as the answer is too obvious.
For too many, it comes down to the warm fuzzy feeling that WE got to choose, without giving a rats censored what the decision actually was.
Some people on here always feel that the EU have a better idea of where to spend its contributions. But it all depends on your perspective.
Elbow thinks that the SE gets more than its share. He may or may not be right.
Imagine if you were a resident of rural Bulgaria and you saw the EU lavish money on the comparatively affluent Cornwall. Would you not have similar feelings of injustice?- Genesis Croix de Fer
- Dolan Tuono0 -
Repeating the lie.ballysmate said:
Your perspective. If you live in a really poor region and you see money spent on a comparatively affluent area, you may feel aggrieved. Just as Elbow seems to feel when the UK spends money in the SE and London instead of other regions.pangolin said:
Pointing it out how?ballysmate said:
We all know that Bulgaria is a net recipient and the UK was a net contributor, that isn't the point I was making. I was pointing out that the EU was equally adept at misallocating funds, dependant on your perspective.rjsterry said:
Bulgaria is the second largest net recipient of EU funding. I think they probably do better than Cornwall out of the deal.ballysmate said:
As I said to Elbowpangolin said:
Ultimately I guess this issue comes down to whether you trust the EU or our Govt more to distribute funds.ballysmate said:
It would have been our choice where to spend our money.elbowloh said:But would that money have ever got spent in Cornwall, we all know the government's funds go to London and the SE right. Next it's the northern powerhouse, no room at the inn for the SW. With the EU funding projects can go direct to the EU and apply for the money.
Actually scratch that, as the answer is too obvious.
For too many, it comes down to the warm fuzzy feeling that WE got to choose, without giving a rats censored what the decision actually was.
Some people on here always feel that the EU have a better idea of where to spend its contributions. But it all depends on your perspective.
Elbow thinks that the SE gets more than its share. He may or may not be right.
Imagine if you were a resident of rural Bulgaria and you saw the EU lavish money on the comparatively affluent Cornwall. Would you not have similar feelings of injustice?0 -
Apologies. I didn't see your further post.elbowloh said:
Repeating the lie.ballysmate said:
Your perspective. If you live in a really poor region and you see money spent on a comparatively affluent area, you may feel aggrieved. Just as Elbow seems to feel when the UK spends money in the SE and London instead of other regions.pangolin said:
Pointing it out how?ballysmate said:
We all know that Bulgaria is a net recipient and the UK was a net contributor, that isn't the point I was making. I was pointing out that the EU was equally adept at misallocating funds, dependant on your perspective.rjsterry said:
Bulgaria is the second largest net recipient of EU funding. I think they probably do better than Cornwall out of the deal.ballysmate said:
As I said to Elbowpangolin said:
Ultimately I guess this issue comes down to whether you trust the EU or our Govt more to distribute funds.ballysmate said:
It would have been our choice where to spend our money.elbowloh said:But would that money have ever got spent in Cornwall, we all know the government's funds go to London and the SE right. Next it's the northern powerhouse, no room at the inn for the SW. With the EU funding projects can go direct to the EU and apply for the money.
Actually scratch that, as the answer is too obvious.
For too many, it comes down to the warm fuzzy feeling that WE got to choose, without giving a rats censored what the decision actually was.
Some people on here always feel that the EU have a better idea of where to spend its contributions. But it all depends on your perspective.
Elbow thinks that the SE gets more than its share. He may or may not be right.
Imagine if you were a resident of rural Bulgaria and you saw the EU lavish money on the comparatively affluent Cornwall. Would you not have similar feelings of injustice?
I was going on this.
But would that money have ever got spent in Cornwall, we all know the government's funds go to London and the SE right.0 -
ballysmate said:
Your perspective. If you live in a really poor region and you see money spent on a comparatively affluent area, you may feel aggrieved. Just as Elbow seems to feel when the UK spends money in the SE and London instead of other regions.pangolin said:
Pointing it out how?ballysmate said:
We all know that Bulgaria is a net recipient and the UK was a net contributor, that isn't the point I was making. I was pointing out that the EU was equally adept at misallocating funds, dependant on your perspective.rjsterry said:
Bulgaria is the second largest net recipient of EU funding. I think they probably do better than Cornwall out of the deal.ballysmate said:
As I said to Elbowpangolin said:
Ultimately I guess this issue comes down to whether you trust the EU or our Govt more to distribute funds.ballysmate said:
It would have been our choice where to spend our money.elbowloh said:But would that money have ever got spent in Cornwall, we all know the government's funds go to London and the SE right. Next it's the northern powerhouse, no room at the inn for the SW. With the EU funding projects can go direct to the EU and apply for the money.
Actually scratch that, as the answer is too obvious.
For too many, it comes down to the warm fuzzy feeling that WE got to choose, without giving a rats censored what the decision actually was.
Some people on here always feel that the EU have a better idea of where to spend its contributions. But it all depends on your perspective.
Elbow thinks that the SE gets more than its share. He may or may not be right.
Imagine if you were a resident of rural Bulgaria and you saw the EU lavish money on the comparatively affluent Cornwall. Would you not have similar feelings of injustice?
I'm guessing you haven't been to Bugle, or any of Cornwall's hinterland. If you had, you might understand why the EU felt it helpful, for the cohesiveness of the UK, to allocate money to Cornwall.0
