eurealist.co.uk

Yet another misleading statement from a professor linked to the Monnet propaganda project.

This time Professor Allan Walker Director, European Research Area in Ageing, University of Sheffield,

Writing in the Guardian attacking Mandelson for suggesting an EU economy of open markets and free trade as the only route to global success.

Not that I care one way or the other if anyone want to attack our latest version of a freeloader, they may do so with my blessing, however Walker not only attacks Mandelson but makes a claim that is totally unsubstantiated “The Dutch and French have already voted against the narrow economic logic that presently dominates the EU.” No Professor, the Dutch and French voted against the EU Constitution.

I understand that these Europhiles have to build a case for their version of the EU but they simply cannot use the rejection of the constitution as an excuse to explain away the fact that the people when asked do not like what is on offer for our lords and masters in Brussels.

Caroline Lucas MEP make the same basic mistaken claim in the Guardian when she says; “It is time for Mandelson and his fellow EU commissioners to stop lecturing us on the merits of free trade and start listening to the voters, who are clamouring for more social regulation and environmental protection, not less”. I wonder on what Ms Lucas bases her claim that people want more interference from Brussels in our daily lives, if she is so certain of her ground perhaps she will back the calls for the referendum in Britian.

Another letter in the paper on the same Mandelson speech from a Bridget Gavin “Brussels” asks us to look at the maths behind Mandelson`s claim that the EU is spending seven times more on agriculture than on science and technology.

Let’s look at the maths: the EU spends 40% of its budget on agriculture, which amounts to 0.4% of total European GDP. The EU’s budget is very small compared to its member states. Total EU budgetary expenditure is very slightly over 1% of the total EU GDP.
The EU is not a “technological community” and it has limited powers in research and technology. The member states are in charge here. According to OECD figures published last year, total spending on research and development as a percentage of GDP in the EU was 1.83%. What is the conclusion? The EU is actually spending 4.5 times more money on scientific research than on agriculture.

I am not mathematically minded but the point dear is the EU budget and how it supports the French farmer.

The final letter in the Guardian is from Harry Beresford someone who is not from Brussels and who does not benefit from EU largesse, makes the only point worth considering and the only point that the Eutocracy cannot accept;

It has obviously never occurred to him (Peter Mandelson) that people may not want any purpose and direction from the EU. They might instead prefer to shape their future through national and local government. They may accept painful reforms from national and local leaders whom they elect, but not from remote, condescending and unaccountable policymakers in the EU.