Sir, There is indeed a solid argument for ending the UK budget rebate, but not the one being touted.

The high level of our EU contributions was one of the costs agreed to by the Heath Government on accession, the price of the indecent obsession with membership.

The Fontainebleau agreement merely went part way to correcting an imbalance. But what followed from that, in turn, was a reluctance by the UK Government to apply for grants, since under the rebate terms two thirds of monies nominally handed back by Brussels to fund key projects would in reality have to be directly provided by the Treasury.

The net result has been seen in such areas as the fishing industry, where Spanish ports and fleets have applied for upgrades while their UK competitors have been in decline.

We pay too much and get a bad deal. We should fix both.

LEE ROTHERHAM
(Adviser, Convention on the Future of Europe, 2002-03)
Westminster, London

From Mr Glen Thompson

Sir, Why are Luxembourg and Ireland — EU countries with among the highest per capita GDPs — still net recipients of EU funds? Ireland, which has enjoyed an economic boom over the last ten years, and Belgium are wealthy recipients, while affluent Denmark and Finland seem to contribute very little to the EU budget. Britain pays more than twice as much as France after our rebate, yet we are constantly depicted as bad Europeans.

The biggest obstacle to Britain getting more enthusiastic about the European project is, in my view, not bureaucracy or loss of sovereignty, it’s that the EU goes against our sense of fair play.

GLEN THOMPSON
Oswaldkirk, York

Explore Letters

• Feedback