Wednesday, 6 July 2011

Communicating with my MP

I sent the following email to my MP, Mr. Alok Sharma, today via they work for you. It said:

Dear Mr. Sharma,
Perusing the Pink Book 2010 (see I notice that the net transfer of money from the UK to the EU institutions is £5,365,000,000 (section 5.1 Current Transfers, p, 80). Given that in 2009 we had a deficit of £32,000,000,000 (Figure 1.3, Trade in goods and service, p. 24) in trade in goods and services with the EU countries would you be so kind as to explain to me in simple terms why we remain a member of the EU? What benefit are we receiving for the £5,365,000,000 membership fee?

Yours sincerely,
Paul Coombes
I will let you know if I get a response.

1 comment:

Oranjepan said...

I can't answer how he'd respond, but I'd point out the growth in trade between Britain and Europe since the foundation of European institutions began the process of economic integration.

Alternatively I'd ask you to point out when was there another period of such peace and prosperity as there is now and upon what basis you think this would be possible without such institutions.

Of course it's your choice if you wish to exchange massive yet immeasurable indirect benefits for relatively minor yet measurable direct benefits, but do you really wish to start appreciating what you've got only once it has gone? And do you wish to be responsible for getting rid of it?

We might talk about any area of concern and say that the current situation is imperfect, but it is completely irresponsible to argue that a lack of double glazing justifies ripping up the foundations of your house whilst there are so many who are homeless living in your back garden!

If the charge is that unemployment in the EU is reaching historic highs due to regulatory problems I might ask where would unemployment have been in 1945 or 1815 or 1648 without the events of preceding years but under the same systems?

So while you can measure the nominal costs, how do you propose to measure the real benefits?