European Communities (Finance) Bill

I want to make a little bit of progress. We are short of time, and the hon. Gentleman has not been present for much of the debate. The Government have made a great deal of the fact that we are closing the gap with France. What they have not acknowledged is that the United Kingdom will pay more than 20 per cent. more net per head of population than the French will. We also hear the argument that the rebate will rise, an argument that was advanced by the Chief Secretary. But why will the rebate rise? Again, the hon. Member for Glasgow, South-West summarised it very neatly. Why do we have a rebate? Because we contribute more than we receive, and the rebate reduces the disparity to some extent. The bigger the disparity, the bigger the rebate. The deal agreed by Tony Blair in December 2005 means that the disparity will get worse. Overall EU spending in cash terms is going up, but in the UK it is going down. Our net contributions increase, so our rebate increases. That is not a triumph for UK diplomacy; it is because our negotiating objectives were not achieved that the rebate is increasing. The other argument that we heard, advanced by Tony Blair when he returned to the House of Commons following the Brussels summit, was that we would see reform of the common agricultural policy. Mr Blair said that President Barroso would begin a review of the EU's budget, including the CAP. He told the House of Commons that this would mean that"““it is then possible for changes to be made to this budget structure in the course of this financing period.”” —[Official Report, 19 December 2005; Vol. 440, c. 1564.]" However, when the consultation document for the review was published in December 2006, there was no suggestion that we would see any budget changes by 2013; in fact, quite the contrary. The document stated: "““It will take a long time horizon…to meet the challenges of the decades ahead. It will therefore not propose a new multi-annual financial framework for the period from 2014—this task will be for the next Commission—nor the overall size and detailed breakdown of the EU Budget.””" Not only will the review not address the budget structure for this financing period, as Tony Blair promised; it will not address the next one, either, which takes us to 2020. Indeed, the failure to reform the CAP in 2005 will make it harder to reform it in future because, in the course of the next seven years, dependency on the CAP will increase in the accession states, and the desire to reform will be reduced. To repeat a point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Altrincham and Sale, West (Mr. Brady), it was not just the press, the Conservative party or Labour Back Benchers who were critical of this deal, but the then Chancellor and current Prime Minister was also very critical. The Sunday Times reported how he was ““quietly fuming””. It said:"““It is understood that despite being 3,000 miles away, the chancellor was ready to make himself available to discuss details of the deal””."