Confusion on EU Budget
There is a lot of confusion in the comments in the papers and blogosphere concerning who voted for what when the European parliament discussed the EU budget proposal including the proposed budget cut negotiated by David Cameron and Angela Merkel.
That's why I posted a link yesterday to the motion proposed by Richard Ashworth MEP on behalf of British Conservatives and our ECR allies to make quite clear where the Conservatives stood. Certain other parties appear to be facing all over the place.
The majority of MEPs voted for a resolution to, quote, "reject the agreement in it's current form" so I don't think it's unfair that many people have described the parliament as having voted down the EU budget cuts proposed by the summit.
However, it would appear that the majority of MEPs are indulging in a certain amount of posturing and trying to get extra money added rather than a serious attempt to send the EU budget back to square one.
It would appear reasonable to assume that the vast majority of those who voted against the summit deal were looking to get more money added, and anyone who voted with them should have been aware that the likely result of that vote would be an attempt to get more money out of european taxpayers.
In terms of how particular political groups have voted, a number of commentators appear to be confused about whether "voting against" means voting against a particular resolution or voting against the cut in the budget. including bloggers and writers on behalf of particular political groups, who seem to be arguing against the way their own MEPs voted. More of this shortly.
In the meantime the Open Europe blog has a good Q and A on what the parliament has done and is trying to do, which is posted as "Did MEPs really vote to reject the EU budget deal?"
That's why I posted a link yesterday to the motion proposed by Richard Ashworth MEP on behalf of British Conservatives and our ECR allies to make quite clear where the Conservatives stood. Certain other parties appear to be facing all over the place.
The majority of MEPs voted for a resolution to, quote, "reject the agreement in it's current form" so I don't think it's unfair that many people have described the parliament as having voted down the EU budget cuts proposed by the summit.
However, it would appear that the majority of MEPs are indulging in a certain amount of posturing and trying to get extra money added rather than a serious attempt to send the EU budget back to square one.
It would appear reasonable to assume that the vast majority of those who voted against the summit deal were looking to get more money added, and anyone who voted with them should have been aware that the likely result of that vote would be an attempt to get more money out of european taxpayers.
In terms of how particular political groups have voted, a number of commentators appear to be confused about whether "voting against" means voting against a particular resolution or voting against the cut in the budget. including bloggers and writers on behalf of particular political groups, who seem to be arguing against the way their own MEPs voted. More of this shortly.
In the meantime the Open Europe blog has a good Q and A on what the parliament has done and is trying to do, which is posted as "Did MEPs really vote to reject the EU budget deal?"
Comments