International

According to most Euro-MPs the European Union, far more than that of the individual member states, is the motor of our economy. Money spent by Brussels gives more added value. That may be the case for cross-border or important innovative projects, but for the rest it seems to me much handier for money to be spent by national governments, who can judge far better than can Brussels the local, regional and national needs of their economies. Furthermore, this approach would avoid a lot of administrative toing and froing.

During the last Strasbourg plenary two weeks ago the European Parliament voted on a motion in the framework of the agreements on the European Union’s new Multi-Annual Budget. In addition to the song of praise for the effectiveness of the European funds, the motion contained a call for the EU to impose its own taxes on financial transactions as well as via the introduction of a European VAT surcharge. Clearly the European Parliament is here suffering from tunnel vision. For years the European Court of Auditors has refused to approve the Commission’s accounts, citing an excess of carelessness and irregularities. How efficient are the funds then? And pumping money around instead of having targeted funds for the poorest member states, or for cross-border and innovative projects, seems to me just as inefficient.

Why then this call for more money and for direct European taxes? This position is simply one which forms part of the hankering for a federal superstate. In America, they have both state and federal taxes. A greatly increased budget for Brussels means in essence a transfer of powers to Brussels. As long as most Dutch people don’t want such a superstate, and as long as Brussels continues to serve the interests of the major corporations, the SP will resist by all means possible this increase in Brussels’ power. Not easy in such a Europhile Parliament, but together with our MPs in the national Parliament we can at least be a much-needed thorn in the side.