It’s a simple fact that most Brexit-denying MPs have little idea what the EU does or how it works.
We know this because we have to listen to them every day, as we wince at their sheer lack of knowledge and at their deliberate attempts to deceive the public in the hope that the vote will be reversed.
Neither do they understand what happens in the real world away from Westminster, or the offices of the Guardian or FT, or their online fantasy worlds of Twitterdom and Neverendumland.
They look through simplistic and rose-tinted spectacles at what they think the EU is. If only they knew....
We believe that it’s still worth trying to put this right
We believe in the people of the United Kingdom. We believe that if more people had known the facts before the Referendum (instead of the now-proven lies of the Cameron government) the majority for Leave would have been much higher.
We think it’s important to inform the entire country and that’s what we have continued to do, every day, both before the Referendum and on every day since then.
Wouldn’t it be nice to live in a more united Kingdom again?
The figure of €43 billion (£37 billion pounds) is the budgeted expenditure for the German Federal Government in relation to costs in 2016 and 2017 of the migrant crisis.
This does NOT include all the costs incurred by Germany’s regional governments. Nor does it include the costs incurred in 2015 when the migrant crisis went into full flood, following Mrs Merkel’s ‘open doors’ announcement that summer.
HOW GERMANY WORKS
Unlike the UK, Germany has a federal structure. There are 16 regions - called Lande - each with their own governments, laws, and budgets.
In UK terms a simplistic way of looking at this is to imagine Great Britain being divided into units like Wales and Scotland.
And then multipy by eight.
The financial contributions from the Federal German Government to the Lande are enormous, but they will not cover everything spent by the Lande governments.
Relevance to the UK and the EU
In 2015 we predicted that the costs to Germany of Mrs Merkel’s ill-advised migrant policy would easily exceed €100 billion. We stand by that prediction.
Indeed, with the German Finance Ministry already admitting to the sums we’ve reported above, and without yet knowing the costs incurred by the Lande and not reimbursed by the Federal Government, it is likely that the official figure will rise to well beyond €100 billion.
To this will be added the costs of family members claiming the right to join those (predominantly young men) who have been granted asylum, which will add considerably to the costs. And even if Germany had not one more asylum application from today, a large part of the currently budgeted costs would continue each year.
It matters to the EU if its biggest economy has to spend billions each year on the consequences of an ill-advised policy adopted by its leader in 2015. If that economy falters, the Euro’s days really are numbered.
For the UK that is relevant.
It alerts the UK to the importance of finding alternative markets to the failing EU, and
Decent Remain voters might reflect that they want to get fully behind Brexit.
3/4 MILLION MIGRANTS CLAIMED ASYLUM IN GERMANY LAST YEAR
German asylum figures jump 56%, says official report
NUMBERS HAVE RISEN 25 TIMES IN 10 YEARS
We can reveal the extent of the challenge which the EU's largest economy is now facing. Despite the billions of taxpayer money which the EU has been throwing at the migrant crisis, the numbers facing Germany are daunting.
With commendable efficiency, the German equivalent of the Office of National Statistics have released figures for asylum applications in Germany in 2016.
The official figures for German asylum-seekers for 2016 show a massive jump of 56.4% compared to 2015 - which was supposedly the crisis year.
64% of all asylum applications last year were from non-Syrians.
Throughout 2016 Mrs Merkel made every attempt to address the problem she had created, using the EU. These attempts included the payment to Turkey of €3 billion euros to stem the tide.
The results are clear from the graphs above.
[ Source: Bundesamt fur Migation und Fluchtlinge (German official agency for migration) | Destatis - official German 'Office for National Statistics' | As usual, journalists and politicians can contact us for the full list of links. ] 05.10am, 31 Jan 2017
GERMAN ‘ALL WELCOME’ MIGRANT POLICY – “WE MADE MISTAKES”
Finance Minister gets closer to apology for German Cabinet’s immigration policy
Yesterday, the German Sunday 'Welt Am Sonntag' ran a piece on the interrogation of German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schauble by their ‘Citizens’ Panel’ containing ordinary members of the public.
During the questioning, Herr Schauble was asked about the ‘All Welcome’ migrant policy of the German government in 2015, which provoked the mass migration into the EU of massive numbers of people from the Middle East and Africa ever since.
The German Finance Minister stated yesterday:
The situation “got out of control”
“We politicians are people and we also make mistakes”
“One can at least learn from mistakes”
Wolfgang Schauble, German Finance Minister
Asylum seekers to be paid “far lower” benefits under new proposal
During the Q&A with ordinary voters, the German Finance Minister was asked about the benefits being paid to migrants. Herr Schauble admitted that the German government is now considering a separate and far lower benefits regime for migrants, to that of the generous benefits provision for German citizens.
"Up until now that has been a tabu in Germany," he said. He added that migrants had been drawn to Germany because all people - refugees and Germans – had to be treated equally.
Any change to the German benefits system to put migrants on the “far lower” regime mentioned by Herr Schauble would require a change to Germany’s constitutional arrangements. Discrimination against migrants would currently not be allowed by Germany’s powerful Constitutional Court.
On the question of terrorism and security, Schäuble explained that training more police recruits took time. "We are used to a high level of security. That is great. However, I think more and more people will throng to Europe. Whether that appeals to us or not, we must learn to cope with it," Schauble said.
How Germany has been rowing back hard in the last 3 months
The comments from the German Finance Minister yesterday (see article above) are just the latest in a growing line of row-backs from German immigration policies.
You will note from the examples we give below, that these are the type of ideas which Angela Merkel and her government vehemently criticised in others over the last few years. Now, without a hint of shame for its hypocrisy, Mrs Merkel's government is starting to adopt ideas which they would previously have described as 'far right' or 'hate speech'.
TURNING BACK MIGRANT BOATS - NOVEMBER 2016
In November last year, the German equivalent of the UK's Home Office proposed the sending of migrants found on boats in the Mediterranean back to Africa.
Boats full of migrants, turned around.
Proposed by liberal Germany, according to their Home Office.
The detail is still unclear and there is talk of the migrants’ boats somehow being taken to Egypt or Tunisia, rather than back to Libya where most of them depart from. No doubt this will mean yet more payments from the EU to Egypt and Tunisia to take in these migrants.
MIGRANT CRISIS: 'NEVER AGAIN' - DECEMBER 2016
In December at her party’s conference, Frau Merkel talked about the migrant crisis and announced :
“A situation like the one in the late summer of 2015 cannot, should not, and must not be repeated.”
BURKA BAN - DECEMBER 2016
“This is why the full face veil is not appropriate and should be outlawed wherever is legally possible.”
(Angela Merkel, 06 Dec 2016, CDU Conference.)
'TERRORIST MIGRANTS MAKING MOCKERY' - JANUARY 2017
In January in her New Year’s message to the German people, she admitted: “And yes, it is especially bitter and detestable when terrorist attacks are committed by people who came to our country claiming to seek protection, people whom our country was eager to help for this reason, and who have now made a cruel mockery of this helping spirit through their deeds.”
BIG CUT TO MIGRANTS’ BENEFITS - JANUARY 2017
And yesterday as we reported above, we had the all-powerful German Finance Minister saying that a “far lower” benefits system is being considered for migrants.
[ Source: German Chancellery, German press, CDU Conference, and others. ]
07.30am, 30 Jan 2017
‘NO TO MORE REFUGEES’, SAYS FRENCH PRESIDENTIAL FAVOURITE
Francois Fillon rejects EU refugee policy, and ‘pulls alarm cord’ on EU
In a major speech in Berlin last week, Francois Fillon slammed the EU and stated:
“We have 6 million unemployed and nearly 9 million poor.”
“My position is clear.”
“France cannot accept more refugees.”
Francois Fillon, favourite to be French President
Monsieur Fillon is the favourite to become France’s President in the elections which begin in 3 months’ time, so the EU elites will have to take notice, even allowing for some campaigning rhetoric.
His statement flies in the face of the EU’s agreed policy on the reallocation of migrants. Here are some of the key quotations from his speech :-
“Let's not cry over the British decision”
“Let us defend a clear line: one can not be both inside and outside, to have access to the European market without respecting the rules that found it. The four freedoms of the European internal market can not be challenged or adopted à la carte: they form a whole, they must be taken together.”
ON THE EU:
“I’m pulling the alarm cord. Europe should increase its power tenfold, now it’s reducing it. It should make decisions, it hesitates. It should simplify, it complicates.”
“By dithering we no longer know where we want to go or what we want to build together. Our weakness is breaking us up.”
“France is not an unlimited territory: we have 6 million unemployed and nearly 9 million poor. My position is clear: France cannot accept more refugees.”
In an article below, we report on M. Fillon’s comments about the UK’s border arrangements in Calais.
[ Source: M. Fillon's presidential campaign ] 09.00am, 29 Jan 2017
This is a public service announcement from Facts4EU.Org
Osbo-Camorageddon virus (variant Little-Farron-1)
REMAINERITIS - A DOCTOR WRITES
Are you feeling uncertain and fearful? Are you experiencing headaches, distress, ongoing worry and tension, and an unrealistic view of simple challenges?
Are uncomfortably-positive facts distorting your post-Brexit dystopian vision?
Don’t worry. All of this is treatable.
These symptoms are common side effects of prolonged EU membership. In many people this has been exacerbated by exposure to the Osbo-Camorageddon virus, of which there was a serious outbreak during the Referendum campaign last year.
You may even have developed the virulent strain of this disease, known by specialists as the "Variant Little-Farron-1", which can lead to severe delusions and an addiction to referendums.
Fortunately there’s a simple cure. Your GP can prescribe ‘Article 50’, a painless formula which is easily digested and only needs to be taken once. You will start feeling better immediately and you’ll be fully cured within two years.
'Article 50' - available from all good governments
and all outlets of UKIP and DUP. Not yet available in other EU countries.
‘FRANCE WILL NO LONGER MANAGE THE UK’S MIGRATORY FLOWS,’
SAYS FRENCH PRESIDENTIAL FAVOURITE
The man tipped to become France’s President in May, Francois Fillon, has said that France will change the Calais border arrangements if he wins.
Francois Fillon, ‘Les Republicains’ candidate for President, currently favourite Major speech in Berlin last week
“We expect the British government to assume all its responsibilities. We will engage with our British partners to renegotiate the Le Touquet treaty.”
“I do not see in what name France would welcome and manage on its soil the migratory flows to Great Britain, which tomorrow will no longer participate in our [European] Union.”
If elected, M. Fillon will renegotiate the ‘Le Touquet’ agreement which currently allows British border officials to operate in Calais, Boulogne, and Dunkirk.
The Touquet Agreement allows British border officers to be based on French soil to check the passport and immigration status of potential entrants to the UK, and for French officers to do the same in the UK for potential entrants to France.
The Agreement in fact has nothing to do with EU membership. It is a bilateral treaty between the UK and France. It came into effect in 2003, via a Statutory Instrument called “The Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 (Juxtaposed Controls) Order 2003”. The geographical areas covered are Calais, Boulogne, and Dunkirk.
Borders, France, the EU, and Elections
It is never spoken of in France, but imagine the effect on French pride every time a migrant is interviewed on French TV. He or she invariably says he wants to go to the UK. The vast bulk of migrants are implicitly rejecting France as their preferred country. And a lack of national pride has never been one of France’s weaknesses.
Monsieur Fillon knows full well that the “migratory flows to Great Britain” which he speaks of are in fact due to the EU’s inability to control its own external borders. In addition, the lack of internal borders caused by the dysfunctional Schengen Zone has exacerbated this situation, with thousands of migrants able to make their way relatively easily from the EU’s southern shores to the northern French ports.
To suggest that the British government should “assume all its responsibilities” for an immigration flow which has been uncontained by many EU countries en route, is a little disingenuous to say the least. To that, one has to add the impetus provided by Mrs Merkel’s disastrous immigration policy announcements in 2015.
However, with just three months to go until the start of the French Presidential elections, perhaps it’s hardly surprising that M. Fillon is wanting to sound tough on such matters.
[ Sources: M. Fillon's presidential campaign | The Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 (Juxtaposed Controls) Order 2003 ]
07.10am, 29 Jan 2017
"A free and independent Britain is a blessing to the world."
"I think Brexit is going to be a wonderful thing for your country."
President of the United States, 27 January 2017
[ Source: The White House ]
07.30am, 28 Jan 2017
BBC’S REMAIN CLUB PLUMBS NEW DEPTHS OF JOURNALISTIC BIAS
BBC’s Political Editor ignores Brexit completely and tells President Trump British viewers are worried about his views on everything else
The BBC’s News and Current Affairs Dept (known here as the BBC Remain Club) surpassed its normal bias yesterday in Washington.
The biggest news story in Britain is Brexit. It has been that way for the last year. So when the BBC was given the plum first question at yesterday’s Trump-May press conference, what did its Political Editor ask?
BBC Political Editor Laura Kuenssberg Source: The White House
“Prime Minister, you’ve talked about where you agree, but you’ve also said you’d be frank where you disagreed with the President. Can you tell us where in the talks you did disagree, and do you think that the President listened to what you had to say?”
“Mr President, you’ve said before that torture works, you’ve praised Russia, you said you want to ban some Muslims from coming to America, you’ve said there should be punishment for abortion. For many people in Britain, those sound like alarming beliefs. What do you say to our viewers at home who are worried about some of your views, and are worried about your becoming leader of the free world?”
‘Prime Minister, you must had had rows with President Trump during your meeting, please tell all.’
‘Mr President, the British hate your views and don’t think you should be President, please comment.’
Today the BBC will no doubt defend itself, so let’s demolish their arguments in advance
This wasn’t a regular press conference with President Trump, held at some in point in the future, where the BBC might have asked about his policies in general. It was held with the British PM – the first foreign leader to meet Mr Trump since his inauguration. Ms Kuenssberg had her moment of fame on the international stage because of the presence of Mrs May.
In what way is it reasonable to ask President Trump only about his domestic policies and his relationship with a third country, and to ignore the most important story for British voters? And in what way is it reasonable to inform President Trump of the alleged views of the BBC’s viewers?
The public pays Glaswegian Ms Kuenssberg’s very high salary for her to ask questions, not to speak for their alleged views. As the BBC’s political editor, we expect her to know which are the most topical and relevant questions to ask. For her to ignore Brexit and a possible UK-US trade deal completely is an error so fundamental that even the most junior reporter on a local paper wouldn’t make it. It can therefore only have been deliberate.
Why the BBC didn’t ask about Brexit or a UK-US trade deal
Ms Kuenssberg is not an idiot, so why did she get it so wrong? Well, let’s see...
Mr Trump is pro-Britain, pro-Brexit, and anti-EU. If he had been pro-Remain and pro-EU, wild horses couldn’t have prevented Ms Kuenssberg from asking about his views on Brexit.
We can imagine what Ms Kuenssberg would have asked, if Mr Trump had been pro-Remain:-
‘Mr President, you’ve said before that EU membership is essential for Great Britain, you’ve praised the EU and Mrs Merkel, you said you want the EU to open its borders fully to Muslims coming from North Africa, you’ve said there should be punishment for Brexit. For many people in Britain, those sound like sensible beliefs. What do you say to our viewers at home who are worried that your views on Brexit aren’t being listened to by Mrs May’s government?’
Ms Kuenssberg’s performance comes on the back of last Sunday’s “Andrew Marr Show” – the BBC’s flagship political interviews programme. Out of Marr's five guests, how many of them do you think supported Leave in the Referendum?
You guessed it. Not a single one.
Can you imagine the furore from Remainers if all five guests had been Brexiteers instead?
There is just one, bright, shining light in the BBC's top news and current affairs team: Andrew Neil, by far the best-informed and most incisive political interviewer on television.
[ Sources: The White House. ]
06.15am, 28 Jan 2017
REMOANER MPs COST TAXPAYERS £7 MILLION FOR ARTICLE 50 BILL DEBATE
5 days of debate on one simple question? Have our MPs nothing better to do?
The First Reading of the 'Article 50 Bill' took place yesterday 26th Jan, with the Second Reading due to start on Tuesday next week. There will be five days of debate, including the Committee Stage which will be a committee of the whole House.
The House of Commons costs approximately £1.35 million per day it sits. The five days of debate will cost the taxpayer almost £7 million.
A Facts4EU.Org Opinion
The people have already suffered 7 months of delay since the Referendum, and yet Remainer MPs are already complaining that 5 days isn’t nearly enough to debate this Bill.
The Bill gives effect to the democratically-expressed will of the British people to leave the EU. It does not set out to scope the negotiations, set objectives, or do anything other than to trigger the process of leaving.
This Bill will enable the government to invoke Article 50 and to give the EU notice. Nothing more, nothing less. What’s to debate?
The question is really :
“Will you respect the people’s democratic vote to leave the EU and will you therefore confer power on the Prime Minister to give notice – Yes or No?”
This has nothing to do with Remainer MPs’ arguments about “what Brexit should look like”. The people voted to leave the EU. MPs simply need to put this into effect by agreeing that the government should inform the EU officially. Debates on detail will come later.
It beggars belief that our Parliamentarians have nothing better to do for five days. And at a cost of £7 million to the taxpayer for the 5 days, (based on Parliament’s accounts), Remoaning MPs should perhaps be asked how they can possibly justify this cost for simply starting the process of executing the people’s will.
[ Sources: UK Parliament website, House of Commons accounts. As usual, journalists and politicians can contact us for the full list of links. ] 05.15am, 27 Jan 2017
Q: WHEN CAN A FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE OF THE EU BE BROKEN?
A: When the EU Commission says so
THE EU ABANDONS A CENTRAL PILLAR OF FREE MOVEMENT – AGAIN
"Internal border controls to be prolonged," says EU Commission yesterday, as the Schengen free movement zone remains in crisis
Yesterday the EU Commission announced that 5 countries have permission to continue breaking the Schengen free movement rules – for another 3 months.
This involves 12 borders within the EU. So the Schengen Agreement - one of the central pillars of the EU’s freedom of movement of people - continues to lie broken.
Meanwhile, the EU is busy telling the UK that it won’t compromise on the fundamental principles of EU membership. Below we show how this is patently untrue.
Free movement of people is one of the 4 holy tenets of the EU religion and the EU has told the UK that these ‘freedoms’ are sacrosanct. This message has been reiterated countless times by Chancellor Merkel, President Hollande, President Juncker of the EU Commission, President Schultz of the EU Parliament, and President Tusk of the EU Council.
However, since Mrs Merkel’s disastrous ‘All Welcome’ immigration policy of 2015, one of the central mainstays of the free movement principle continues to be in crisis in 2017.
Please note that these do not include unofficial actions taken by many member states over the last 18 months. For example on the France-Italy southern border, checks were introduced, and there are now many fences between Member States south and west of Austria.
What is Schengen?
Schengen is ostensibly a border-free zone across EU Member States. Currently the UK and Ireland are the only two countries to have opt-outs.
Here's what the EU itself says about the importance of Schengen to free movement
"Schengen is one of the major achievements of European integration. The creation of an internal area without borders where persons and goods can circulate freely has brought important benefits to European citizens and business alike."
"Schengen is one of the key means through which European citizens can exercise their freedoms, and the internal market can prosper and develop."
The EU Commission Schengen Roadmap, Mar 2016
"The border-free Schengen Area guarantees free movement to more than 400 million EU citizens"
“EU citizens need to be able to freely and safely travel within the Union. The Schengen Area has made this a concrete reality.”
“The Schengen Area is one of the greatest achievements of the EU.”
Member states started breaking the Schengen zone by unilateral actions in 2015. Twice in 2016 the EU Commission gave some of them formal permission (in retrospect) to do this.
Last March the EU commission said that Schengen would be restored "as quickly as possible and with a clear target date of December 2016".
Yesterday, 25th Jan 2017, the EU Commission recommended to the EU Council that countries should continue to be allowed to break the Schengen code for another 3 months.
The EU's fundamental principles.
Capable of being broken when they need to.
Another EU lie debunked for the British people.
This is Part 4 in our series "How the British Public continue to be deceived - The single market, the 4 freedoms, the customs union, and other 'sacrosanct principles of the EU'
[ Sources: EU Commission documents. Journalists and politicians can contact us for the full list of links. ] 07.00am, 26 Jan 2017
NEW BREXIT-THEMED FAST-FOOD RESTAURANT OPENS IN BRUSSELS
We just received the following menu flyer from a new place in town
'Where everybody knows your game!'
From 8am to 11am
‘Brexfast’ ............................... Full English .............................................. €60 billion
(Please order in advance, preparation time approx 10 years)
Continental option ................. Jus de Cognac .......................................... €10.00
From 12am to 10pm
‘Ze Brusselburger’ ................ Served with ‘ex-pat’ bargaining chips ............ €27.50
‘De Verhofstadt’ .................... Belgian waffle, served with sour cream ......... €15.50
Please note: The management regrets that whilst it is happy to discuss the menu with British MEPs, no orders can be taken prior to Brexit.
Prices include EU tariffs of up to 70% on agricultural produce. All dishes comply with 769 EU Directives involved in the sourcing of the ingredients, and their production, preparation, cooking, and delivery. No British MEPs were knowingly harmed in the making of this flyer.
Chez Juncker, 1 EU Strasse, Brussels, United States of Europe
A little fun from Facts4EU.Org, 11.00am, 25 Jan 2017
EU TREATIES DO NOT PREVENT UK HAVING TRADE TALKS, ADMITS EU COMMISSION
‘Discussing a trade menu is allowed, ordering the food is not’
“Nothing in the EU Treaties prevents a member state from discussing trade with other countries”
EU Commission Official Spokesman, Brussels, 24 Jan 2017
EU Commission building, Brussels
THE COMMISSION IS WEAKENING
The EU Commission’s official spokesman yesterday gave more information about the continuing climbdown of their position on whether the UK can start trade talks with other countries.
Since the Referendum, Facts4EU.Org has regularly published facts showing that the UK is entitled to begin trade talks with countries around the world, in preparation for signature of deals on Brexit. Despite this, the UK government has yet to state clearly that this is the legal position.
The UK has repeatedly been threatened by the EU Commission and the EU Council over trade talks with other countries. For months, any suggestion that the UK might start talking to other countries was greeted with an absolute ban.
Now it seems their position is weakening. Here’s the video :-
On 4th Sept 2016 at the G20 Summit in Hangzhou, China, the then Australian PM Malcolm Turnbull warmly greeted a future trade deal with the UK. “We have got things moving towards having a free-trade agreement with the UK,” he said.
However EU Commission President Juncker was also in China on the same day, and he told reporters that such discussions were an “exclusive matter” for the European Union on behalf of its members and “we are sticking to it”.
Previously President Juncker had made many comments about the UK not talking to other nations about trade, even suggesting that legal action may be taken.
It’s worth remembering that on the day of Referendum result, 24th June 2016, EU Commission President Juncker told the ARD German TV channel: "It is not an amicable divorce but it was also not an intimate love affair."
So, discussing a trade menu is allowed, ordering the food is not. Given that the UK has no intention of ‘ordering the food’ until after Brexit, we hope that Dr Liam Fox and his team at the Dept of International Trade are ploughing full-steam ahead.
It would however be good to hear an unequivocal statement to this effect.
This is rather like the Prime Minister for months describing being outside the jurisdiction of the ECJ and taking back control of immigration, before finally stating last week that the UK would be leaving the Single Market.
It was obvious, but she wouldn’t admit it for months.
Isn’t it now time for the UK to present a more confident face to the world? If Liam Fox were to announce formally that the UK is open for full and frank discussions on future trade arrangements with other countries, the realities might not change but the perception would.
[ Sources: EU Commission | ARD | and other sources. Journalists and politicians can contact us for the full list of links. ] 06.45am, 25 Jan 2017
EXCLUSIVE SHOCK REPORT ON EU FUND OF ALMOST £400 BILLION
The British get a very poor deal
Estonians receive 13 times more than the allocation for Brits
Even the French get 60% more than we do
HOW THE EU SPENDS YOUR MONEY
A Facts4EU.Org special report on the EU’s “Structural and Investment Funds”
During the Referendum campaign, much was made by the Remain campaign and the Cameron government about the money which the UK receives back each year from its EU contributions.
We decided to take a look at a major area of expenditure of the EU. This area of funding has a boring title, to make it unlikely that normal people will be interested. However we did the research, and the facts are very interesting indeed.
The EU’s planned ‘structural’ spend by 2020 is £392,926,880,903
That’s nearly £400 billion
And the UK comes 24th in the list of beneficiary countries by household
In the articles coming below we give you some more shocking facts.
These are all based on EU official figures.
A lot of research went into this, to show you how taxpayer money is distributed by the EU.
We hope you will find this report useful in the fight to gain a clean Brexit.
[ Sources: All information comes from official EU sources. Journalists and politicians can contact us for the full list of links. ] 05.45am, 24 Jan 2017
The EU refers to it as the ESI Fund or ‘European Structural and Investment Fund’. It is in fact broken down into 6 major elements :
43.2% - European Regional Development Fund – ERDF
21.9% - European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development – EAFRD
19.0% - European Social Fund – ESF
13.9% - Cohesion Fund – CF (New members only)
1.3% - European Maritime & Fisheries Fund - EMFF
0.7% - Youth Employment Initiative – YEI
(We explain each fund in an article to come below.)
We have only used the figures for the EU’s use of its “own” funds – not the additional funds which member states contribute to each programme themselves.
An example - improving a road in N.W. Romania
On Friday we reported on just one expenditure in Romania, where the EU has allocated €57 million from the ERDF Fund to pay for improvements to 3 sections of a Romanian road. (The DN1C, in case you’re interested.) The EU made this announcement in French.
"Travel time on the section between Baia Mare and Halmeu was to be reduced by six minutes, as was the travel time between Baia Mare and Satu Mare, which will also be cut by six minutes, while travel time between Satu Mare and Halmeu was to be reduced by three minutes."
One hesitates to speculate on what the Romanians would make of travel times in some parts of the UK, which haven't benefited from such generous EU funding.
Which Countries Get The Most Money?
All EU member states receive a proportion of the money in this EU ‘ESI Fund’, which in total is worth almost £400 billion for the accounting period 2014-2020. (The exact sum is currently £393 billion.)
However as with most things EU, the unelected EU Commission manages the ESIF. Effectively they decide who gets what. Here are the top 6 beneficiary countries by total amount, in billions.
Poland is by far the biggest beneficiary, with a total which is more than double the next biggest recipient, Italy.
EVEN THE RICH EU COUNTRIES BENEFIT MORE THAN THE UK
This isn’t only about poorer EU countries, the rich ones do better than us too
Many British people would understand if some poorer countries in the EU received more from these funds, to help them to grow and prosper.
However the disparities between recipient countries are very large. Estonian households are benefiting by the equivalent of £6,445 each, compared to the UK’s £500 per household.
In essence these disparities represent a significant transfer of wealth – something which British people may not have been aware of. Furthermore this doesn’t explain why the UK seems to be so disadvantaged compared to rich, developed countries like Germany and France.
We are forced to ask why Spain, Ireland, France, Italy, Germany, and other developed EU states receive so much more per household than Britain does.
Spain : 248% more
Ireland : 232% more
Italy : 177% more
Finland : 150% more per household
Austria : 115% more
France : 60% more
Germany : 18% more
Sweden : 14% more
The administration of these funds is in the hands of the unelected EU Commissioners, in discussion with member states. If they make poor decisions, and if the funds are distributed in ways you feel unjust, you cannot vote these people out at any election.
Brexit-denying politicians and campaigners might like to explain why a country like France receives 60% more per household from these funds than the UK.
Our final article about this EU "ESI Fund" will appear below shortly.
[ Sources: All information comes from official EU sources. Journalists and politicians can contact us for the full list of links. ] 07.30am, 24 Jan 2017
ERDF – (A catch-all, plus climate change) “The European Regional Development Fund has a strong focus on 4 key priority areas: Research and Innovation, the Digital Economy, SME competitiveness and the Low Carbon Economy. The ERDF also finances ‘Interreg’ – cross-border, transnational or interregional co-operation under the Territorial Co-operation objective.”
EAFRD – (Rural support) “The EU’s rural development policy helps the rural areas of the EU to meet the wide range of challenges and opportunities that face them in terms of economic, environmental and social development.”
ESF – (EU social fund) “The European Social Fund is Europe’s main instrument for investing in people. It helps people find employment or create businesses, supports disadvantaged groups, improves education and makes public services more efficient.”
CF – (For new members ONLY) “The Cohesion Fund concerns 15 Member States - Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Greece, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia. Its funding is allocated to trans-European transport networks and to projects falling under EU environmental priorities.”
EMFF – (Fishing, basically) “The EMFF is the financial instrument that will help deliver the objectives of the reformed Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) and that will support the implementation of the EU Integrated Maritime Policy (IMP). It will contribute to sustainable and competitive fisheries and aquaculture, to a consistent framework for the Integrated Maritime Policy and to a balanced and inclusive territorial development of fisheries and aquaculture areas.”
YEI – (Desperate and overdue attempt by the EU to show they care about a generation on the dole.) “The Youth Employment Initiative helps Member States respond to high level of youth unemployment by supporting tailored measures to integrate young people not in employment, education or training into the labour market.”
The series of 4 articles above took an enormous amount of research. We would like to think that information like this is important in winning the hearts and minds of those who voted Remain - something which can help to unite the country ready for our exciting post-Brexit future.
Please help to support our work if you can, and please post links widely.
[ Sources: All information comes from official EU sources. Journalists and politicians can contact us for the full list of links. ] 08.00am, 24 Jan 2017
Ms Malmstrom said “We are negotiating around 16-17 trade deals right now”. In fact our research shows that the EU is actually only working on 8 negotiations currently. This is based on a Jan 2017 document from the EU Commission. Many talks are stalled, such as the TTIP deal with the USA which all parties agree will almost certainly never happen at all.
An occasional series, keeping you up-to-date with the important things the EU does
Yesterday's news from various parts of the EU machine
EU gives an extra €40 million to Africa's Lake Chad region
EU gives €65 million grant to Zambia to improve energy supplies to 63,000 households in Lusaka City
EU gives €57 million to Romania to pay for improvements to a road. (The DN1C between Dej and Baia Mare, in case you’re interested.)
And finally, the one that nearly got away
Yesterday the EU published its annual report on the economy of “the EU Fishing Fleet”. (Did you even know that the EU now considers all member states’ fishing boats to be part of its own fleet?)
Bizarrely, the report is for 2014, yet it was published yesterday. If it takes the EU two years just to report on fisheries in 2014, imagine how long it will take them to negotiate a trade deal with the UK.
Anyway, impoverished fishing towns around the coast of the United Kingdom will be pleased to know that "The positive trend of the last years has resulted in higher salaries for fishermen, bigger profits for the fishing sector, and more value added for the EU's fishing and coastal communities."
[ Sources: EU Commission | EU Cohesion Project | EU Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries | Journalists and politicians can contact us for the full list of links, as usual. ] 07.15am, 20 Jan 2017
At 9pm last night, Ed Conway published a further piece on this in which he wrote:-
"Indeed, the Australian finance minister, Mathias Corman (sic), told me informal trade talks were already under way, and that a trade deal could be concluded ‘very quickly’."
"As it happens, Australia is a past master at fast trade negotiations. While many countries take many years to talk through these things, Australia negotiated a free trade agreement with the US in less than a year."
Mathias Cormann, Australian Finance Minister
We just need to correct Mr Conway on two things: the spelling of Mr Cormann’s name, and the fact that Australia negotiated its trade deal with the US in 16 months, not “less than a year”. As usual you can rely on us to get the facts straight. 16 months is still much faster than the EU has been able to do anything, so there’s no need to exaggerate.
For months Mr Conway has been categorically trotting out the EU’s line to Sky News’ viewers, that no trade discussions can begin until Britain has left the EU. Even yesterday afternoon he was tweeting that “Formal trade talks with Australia cannot begin until the UK has officially left the EU.”
It’s encouraging to see the PM and International Trade Secretary Liam Fox in Davos yesterday talking about having trade discussions with other countries. However we maintain our long-held and published opinion that the UK government should make it clear to the EU that formal trade discussions are taking place, whether they like it or not.
The EU’s position is untenable. Their stance is akin to saying that an employer has the right to prevent an employee from having talks or interviews with prospective new employers. The legal term for this is ‘restraint of trade’ and in our opinion the extent to which the EU wish to apply this to the UK would be considered unreasonable by any British court.
Regardless of any legal niceties, we do not believe that the Court of World Opinion would side with the EU. The UK should press on boldly.
A BIG THANK YOU TO OUR LATEST SUBSCRIBERS AND DONORS
GOLD MEMBERS - P Abbott - E Sussex
MEMBERS - P Hughes - Gloucs | J Holmes, Shropshire
VALUED SUPPORTERS - D Kennion, Gloucs | G Ambler, Suffolk | K Pinder, Devon | C Thompson, Lincs | G Reakes, Kent | Anonymous, Aberdeen | W Halton, Ceredigion (Wales)
WHY THE NEWLY ASSERTIVE THERESA MUST ASSERT SOME MORE
The PM made some bold statements in her major Brexit speech on Tuesday.
It’s time for one more.
The EU’s pronouncements are being reported all over the World. We read and watch the global reactions on a daily basis.
In the absence of the British government refuting these, we then see the World’s leaders repeating the EU’s assertions and believing them to be fact.
One important example is the EU’s claim that the UK can’t talk to other countries about trade deals until after the UK has exited the EU. In the article below, we give the legal opinion refuting this by the excellent Lawyers For Britain.
Here is why this matters
The EU is incapable of agreeing a trade deal with the UK within the next 2 years
The most likely outcome is a reversion to WTO tariffs, until the EU comes to its senses
The UK must therefore be free to agree schedules with the WTO, ready to trade on Day One
The UK must also be free to negotiate trade arrangements with the countries who want this
These countries need to know that the Dept of International Trade can agree deals now
Even trade arrangements with the UK’s many friends around the World will take some time. However there is no reason why some deals can’t be put in place within 2 years. We have numerous examples of this being done bilaterally between many countries.
The US and Australia did a deal in just 16 months
Australia’s Free Trade Agreement with the USA took just 16 months to negotiate. It has been in force since Jan 2005.
This is something the EU hasn’t been capable of in all its 60 years of existence.
It's essential that the UK is free to emulate Australia.
Once again we call on the government to make an unequivocal statement that it is exercising its legal rights and that the Dept of International Trade, led by the Rt Hon Liam Fox, is ready to negotiate trade deals to execute on the day of the UK’s departure from the EU.
It is essential that the World knows that the United Kingdom is truly open for business as an independent and globally-facing nation.
[ Sources: Australian Gov't Trade Dept data | Official EU Eurostat data | Journalists and politicians can contact us for the full list of links, as usual. ] 07.00am, 19 Jan 2017
The eminent EU-specialist lawyer and QC Martin Howes of Lawyers for Britain says “The process of negotiating new trade deals can be started during the 2-year notice period leading up to Brexit, with a view to bringing them into force on or soon after the date of exit.”
UK CAN NEGOTIATE TRADE DEALS NOW - THE LEGAL CASE
Lawyers confirm that the UK can prepare trade deals now, despite legal threats from EU
Earlier this week we published articles on the continual claims by the EU, agreed with by government ministers, that the UK is legally prevented from pursuing trade opportunities with the rest of the world prior to Brexit.
In her speech on Tuesday, Mrs May made much of the new 'Global Britain' trading internationally. Whilst she said that discussions with other countries have started, she still did nothing to negate the interdiction by the EU and threats of legal action.
It's a fact that world leaders believe the EU, not the UK, and have made statements to this effect. The most recent was from the PM of New Zealand in Brussels last week.
HERE IS THE LEGAL CASE FOR NEGOTIATING TRADE DEALS NOW
Our condensed summary of legal opinion from the 'Lawyers for Britain' Report
The view that the UK may not negotiate future free trade agreements (‘FTAs’) with countries outside the EU while it remains a member state is not supported in the EU Treaties or by the decisions of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU).
The EU may not prevent the UK negotiating and entering into such treaties providing that they will not come into force until the UK withdraws from the EU.
The EU Treaties give the Union the exclusive right to enter into FTAs with non-EU countries. However member states give up this right on the basis that they will be members of the Union once they come into force. Any exit may go through a process of departure likely to take some years.
EU member states have a duty of sincere co-operation with each other. What the CJEU has never suggested is that this duty gives it the jurisdiction to consider whether member states negotiating treaties outside the EU’s competence might damage the wider interests of the Union.
A treaty coming into force after the UK withdrew from the EU would not be in breach of the UK’s treaty obligations to the EU. By analogy, the UK would be acting no differently to a person negotiating a new employment contract before the end of his current employment.
The EU has the objective of creating an area of prosperity and good neighbourliness outside it. In taking steps to enhance its economic prosperity once it left the Union, the UK would be acting in accordance with that object. If the EU sought to prevent such steps, it would endanger the wider area of prosperity and its good relations with its future neighbour.
You can read the full report from Francis Hoar, barrister and Committee Member of Lawyers for Britain, here. Mr Hoar was the barrister who won the celebrated High Court judgement in 2015, which voided the election of the Mayor of Tower Hamlets. This was the longest election petition in English legal history, lasting over six weeks.
Our Opinion Last year we repeatedly argued that the EU has no legal basis for preventing the UK from negotiating trade deals, ready to implement on the day of the UK's exit.
In our next article, appearing above in the next hour, we will set out why this is so important.
[Sources: With kind permission of Lawyers for Britain ] 04:30am, 19 Jan 2017
While Britain and the world was focused on Mrs May’s speech, yesterday the EU quietly published the final report of the ‘High Level Group On Own Resources’. This Group, headed by former unelected Italian PM and Goldman Sachs Senior Adviser Mario Monti, looked at new ways for the EU to raise and spend money.
The Group was jointly appointed by the EU’s 3 major institutions: the Commission, the EU’s Parliament, and the EU Council of Ministers, and was presented yesterday to the Presidents of all 3 bodies.
The report’s conclusions completely vindicate the warnings that we and some Leave organisations made prior to the Referendum. Our warnings were dismissed by the Remain campaign.
Here are some of the EU's new plans:-
UK’s rebate to be axed, increasing the UK’s contributions by £4.6 billion per year
This figure is based on the official OBR’s (Office for Budget Responsibility) 2016 forecast
New EU-wide tax on companies and new EU VAT provisions
A new financial transaction tax or other financial activities' tax
New tax on electricity, and a motor fuel tax
New border control tax, new tax on the digital single market
Find better ways to ‘fudge’ the way the EU is funded
The UK’s gross contributions would rise to £456 million per week. Even the net figure would be £376 million. That’s £26 million per week more than Leave claimed as the gross figure.
The report is breathtaking in very many ways, not least in its’ proposals on how information should be presented to the people.
“When we talk about financing the EU budget the ‘taxpayers’ are actually the 28 Member States, not the 510 million citizens”
There is no universe in which this statement is true. It’s as if the EU wants people to believe that governments have magic pots of money, completely unconnected to the work done by people in member states to generate national income.
In an astonishing move, the report even goes on to claim that there will be no net increase in the EU budget. This is pure sleight of hand, shifting the ways in which funds are labelled. In reality the peoples of the EU member states will end up paying more.
In particular, the people of the UK would end up paying far more.
£4.6 billion more per year, based on the OBR’s figures for 2016.
Please remember: You read this here first.
If you wish us to continue producing essential and unique news like this,
please consider supporting us with a donation or subscription.
[ Sources: EU Report Summary and several other EU documents | OBR official forecasts 2016 | Journalists and politicians can contact us for the full list of links, as usual. ] 06.45am, 18 Jan 2017
Yesterday the PM delivered a strategy based on what the people voted for
Here are some of the key points:-
End to jurisdiction of European Court of Justice
End to vast contributions to the EU every year
Control of borders, end to free movement
No to membership of the Single Market
Out of the Customs Union
No to Common Commercial Policy, no to Common External Tariff
Yes to free trade agreement with EU
Prepared to walk away – ‘no deal is better than a bad deal’
Yes to WTO and free trade deals with rest of the world
Existing laws on workers’ rights to be protected
Yes to maintaining the Common Travel Area with Ireland
Yes to collaborating with EU on science and technology initiatives
Yes to collaborating with EU on crime, terrorism, foreign affairs
In a strong, clear statement of intent, the Prime Minister delivered a strategy for a clean and pragmatic Brexit yesterday.
"We are leaving the European Union, but we are not leaving Europe. And that is why we seek a new and equal partnership – between an independent, self-governing, Global Britain and our friends and allies in the EU."
"Not partial membership of the European Union, associate membership of the European Union, or anything that leaves us half-in, half-out. We do not seek to adopt a model already enjoyed by other countries. We do not seek to hold on to bits of membership as we leave."
"No, the United Kingdom is leaving the European Union."
The Prime Minister, 17 Jan 2017
There remain many matters of detail to clarify but this speech went further than many had predicted. Congratulations to all of you who worked so hard to get us to this point.
At Facts4EU.Org we’ve published several articles in the last year, debunking this myth with facts. We have published links to a legal report from eminent EU-specialist barristers, and to EU Treaties. We’ve challenged the Government to accept the fact that:
The UK CAN engage in trade talks with the USA, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, South Korea, and all the other countries who wish to do trade deals with the UK.
We now challenge the EU to produce evidence of the claim by its Foreign Minister yesterday.
We also challenge the UK Government to state clearly that there is no legal impediment to the UK negotiating trade deals right now with other countries, for implementation on the day of exiting the EU.
[ Sources: EU Commission AV Services | Other sources are contained in the articles below. | Journalists and politicians can contact us for the detailed list of links, as usual. ] 05.00am, 17 Jan 2017
The EU elites are desperate to stop the UK from succeeding with Brexit
Jean-Claude Juncker, President of the EU Commission, has threatened the UK with legal action if it conducts trade negotiations with other countries. This accords with his emotional statement on 24th June that "This will not be an amicable divorce" - something which even Angela Merkel has since contradicted.
Since June last year there have been many pronouncements and warnings by the EU against the UK talking to the many countries who now wish to strike trade deals.
The latest of these warnings came yesterday, when the EU’s Foreign Minister said:
“It is absolutely clear on the EU side that as long as a country is a member state of the EU... there are no negotiations bilaterally on any trade agreement with third parties.”
“This is in the treaties and this is valid for all member states as long as they remain member states until the very last day.”
Back in October, the Prime Minister was asked a question about this issue in the House.
Question from Jonathan Djanogly, MP for Huntingdon :
“Technically, it seems that the UK cannot enter into trade deals with third-party countries while we are still a member of the EU.”
Answer from the Prime Minister :
“My hon. Friend is right that there is a limit to what we can do when it comes to entering into a trade arrangement before we have left the EU, but that does not mean that we cannot scope out negotiations and start to have those discussions.”
The PM didn’t go nearly far enough, but in any case it seems that the civil servants in the Foreign Office, the Dept for Brexit, and the Dept for International Trade continue to believe the EU’s case completely.
This remains deeply worrying. It is essential that the UK should be pursuing new trade arrangements with the large number of countries queueing up to do deals with the UK on its exit from the EU.
It’s a simple fact that the EU elites are determined to show the other countries in the Union that they would suffer if they also decided to leave. Their political and bureaucratic careers depend on this.
It’s high time the government faced the EU down, with a clear statement that there is no legal basis for its assertions. Tomorrow we will publish (once again) the legal case.
[ Sources: Hansard 25/10/2016 | EU Commission AV Services | Other sources are contained in the articles below. | Journalists and politicians can contact us for the detailed list of links, as usual. ] 06.00am, 17 Jan 2017
Population : 434,403 (equivalent to Kirklees in W Yorks)
Economy (GDP) : £7.8 bn - The UK’s economy is 240 times bigger than Malta’s
Physical size : 122 sq miles - The UK is 767 times bigger than Malta
Location: 50 miles south of Italy, with Tunisia to the west and Libya to the south
Malta became independent of the UK in 1964
It renounced the Queen as Head of State in 1974 and became a republic
It joined the EU in 2004 and adopted the Euro in 2008
Asked about Brexit during a press conference with EU Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker last week, the Maltese Prime Minister said:
[When the vote comes up] “the European Parliament might be in the mood to scuttle the whole deal”.
Regarding the last meeting of the Heads of State of the EU27 countries: “I’ve rarely been in a discussion on any other subject where the 27 member states have basically [held] the same position”.
[EU Commission press conference in Malta]
Maltese Prime Minister
This is yet another example of an EU 'Presidency'.
Yesterday we highlighted the elections tomorrow (Tuesday) for President of the EU’s Parliament. You don’t have a vote of course, and you’re not even allowed to know how the individual MEPs voted because it’s a secret ballot. That’s EU democracy in action.
We also showed how the new President will preside over a parliament which costs £1.6 billion per year to run, with the 766 MEPs effectively costing over £2 million per year each.
By population, Malta is equivalent to Kirkless in West Yorkshire. Try to imagine David Shears, Labour Leader of Kirklees Council, holding international press conferences with President Juncker, pronouncing on Brexit, and having a vote on the final deal.
Malta is a beautiful country but it’s the smallest in the EU. Its economy is 1/240th the size of the UK’s. Yet Malta is one of the 27 countries which will have to approve any deal between the UK and the EU. Would you be happy with the Leader of Kirklees Council (with a population of EU citizens the same as that of Malta) having a vote on the Brexit deal?
This is another public service piece from Facts4EU.Org, presenting facts to inform the British public.
When we have to stop through lack of funding, which of the major Brexit campaign organisations will bring you information like this?
[ Sources: IMF World Database Oct 2016 | UN Stats Database | Office of National Statistics data on populations in the UK | Journalists and politicians can contact us for the detailed list of links, as usual. ] 05.45am, 16 Jan 2017
EU’S PARLIAMENT COSTS £1.6 BILLION PER YEAR TO RUN
THAT'S OVER £2 MILLION PER MEP PER YEAR
The EU’s bizarre interpretation of ‘Democracy’ is a costly business
The EU has a parliament, which it grandiosely calls ‘the European Parliament’. It’s not known how the 20+ non-EU countries in Europe feel about this, but that’s its name. The correct name should of course be “the European Union Parliament”.
EU Parliament building in Strasbourg - used twice a month
TWO PRESIDENTS TAKE OFFICE NEXT WEEK: ONE IN THE USA AND ONE IN BRUSSELS
You may have heard of Donald Trump, but what of the other one?
Next week the EU elects a new President. As the old saying goes: ‘Now not a lot of people know that’. On Tuesday the European Parliament Presidential Election will take place, when the current President Schulz steps down after the maximum two terms in office.
What does the President do?
“The President oversees all of the Parliament's work, its governing bodies and plenary debates. He or she represents the Parliament in all legal affairs and external relations and at the start of every European Council summit sets out the Parliament's point of view about the items on the agenda. The President also signs the EU budget into law and co-signs legislation with the President of the Council.”
[EU Parliament website]
Current President of the EU's Parliament Herr Schulz
What’s the relevance to British voters? Very few people know what the Parliament does, or what its powers are.
One power may interest you – the Parliament can effectively veto any Brexit deal.
The candidates for the Presidency – Can you name any of them?
The election process is typically Eurocratic. Firstly, the ballot is secret - you are not allowed to know how your MEP actually voted. Secondly, there isn’t just one ballot, except in the unlikely event where one candidate receives over 50% of the vote. There can be up to four ballots before the winner emerges.
Once a new President is elected, MEPs then elect 14 vice-presidents, again by secret ballot.
There are seven candidates for President. Some British people may vaguely have heard of one of them: Guy Verhofstadt, an unpleasant Belgian who hates all Eurosceptics. He will not win.
Before you breathe a sigh of relief, none of the other candidates like Eurosceptics either, apart from a Romanian. And he won’t win either.
We confidently predict an Italian will win. On Tuesday be ready to break out the Prosecco for either Gianni Pittella (S&D) or Antonio Tajani (EPP).
Tuesday is the day the PM will give her major speech on Brexit, so the TV news will be full of that and your new President will barely be mentioned. We therefore thought you might like to know more about the absurdities of EU democracy, with this public service article from Facts4EU.Org.
[ Sources: EU Parliament website | Politico Presidential debate | Journalists and politicians can contact us for the detailed list of links, as usual. ] 06.30am, 15 Jan 2017
2 out of 3 of our pieces which got picked up by the national press in the last week.
Our work has been used by the mainstream press and by MPs asking questions in Parliament.
A BIG THANK YOU TO OUR LATEST DONORS
GOLD MEMBER - P Abbott - E Sussex
VALUED SUPPORTERS - D Kennion, Gloucs | G Ambler, Suffolk | K Pinder, Devon | C Thompson, Lincs | G Reakes, Kent | Anonymous, Aberdeen | W Halton, Ceredigion (Wales)
We're a small not-for-profit team, relying on voluntary donations, and we punch above our weight.
Our articles take many hours of research, writing, editing, coding and production.
To get a clean Brexit, it seems we have to fight.
We badly need your help to keep going. Please, please support our work.
Please scroll up to the top of the page for the donation options.
Facts4EU.Org Jan 2017
EU FUNDS TURKISH UNIVERSITY LAW STUDENTS’ MIGRANT CLINIC
Yildirim Beyazit University of Ankara, Faculty of Private International Law
One way the UK taxpayer is funding Turkey, under the label of an ‘EU Fund’
ANOTHER FACTS4EU.ORG EXCLUSIVE
EU uses taxpayer money to fund Turkish law students “to gain practical experience in refugee law”, with expensive promo video by the EU to promote the project.
This is one small example of some important points about EU spending
The EU spends billions of EU taxpayer money outside the EU
The foreign recipients are told the money is from ‘the EU’
In fact 2/3rds didn’t come from the EU at all, but from additional funds which member states like the UK are providing
These funds are often labelled generically under the term ‘humanitarian assistance’
"We are very happy to be part of this project, co-funded by the EU and UNHCR," says Asst Professor Aygul of the Faculty of Private International Law at the Yildirim Beyazit University of Ankara. "I believe it’s a very useful project, for our students, for our Faculty, and for the refugees themselves."
"It also allows [Turkish] law students to gain practical experience in refugee law and international protection," says the EU Commission’s Neighbourhood & Enlargement Directorate.
This is one of countless examples of the EU funding a foreign country, outside the EU, and it seems a main benefit is to that country’s law students.
As we reported yesterday, according to the EU only 8.6% of Syrian refugees in Turkey are living in temporary camps. The other 91.4% are living in the community and this service appears to be for those people.
FARRON AND BREXIT-DENIERS NEED LESSONS IN WORLD TRADE
Belittling New Zealand is unwise when you look at the facts
Yesterday the visiting PM of New Zealand confirmed he is “ready to negotiate a high quality trade agreement with the UK when it is in a position to do so”.
Tim Farron’s response was to belittle New Zealand as a small country and declare that the PM was “pulling up the drawbridge on a market of over 500 million”.
HERE ARE SOME UNCOMFORTABLE FACTS FOR MR FARRON
New Zealand’s economy is bigger than 10 out of the 27 other EU countries
It's growing 50% faster than the Eurozone
Population: 4.75 million
NZ has invested £19.1 billion in the UK
UK has invested £44.8 billion in NZ
UK sells £1.3 billion of goods and services to NZ
New Zealand also happens to be a great friend of the UK and is a member of the ‘Five Eyes’ key intelligence group (the others being the US, Canada, Australia and the UK) which is far more important than the EU’s intelligence services and has helped to protect the UK for decades.
The only downside to the UK’s relationship with New Zealand is their famous ‘All Blacks’ rugby team, No.1 in the World, which regularly beats all the Home Nations’ sides.
EU Commission confirms taxpayer-funded cash-card for 1 million migrants
Yesterday the EU Commission announced its progress on the monies it agreed to send to Turkey as part of the deal Mrs Merkel negotiated with President Erdogan, in an effort to address the worst effects of her ‘All Welcome’ announcement in 2015.
It has been decided that an EU-funded cash-card will be issued to 1 million migrants in Turkey, “to meet their basic needs in a dignified manner”.
The EU Commission goes on to say that “The package of assistance will be … transferred directly to beneficiaries on a monthly basis through unrestricted and unconditional cash transfers.”
According to the EU there are 3 million Syrian refugees in Turkey. However in detailed documents the EU admits that only 8.6% of Syrian refugees in Turkey are living in temporary camps. The other 91.4% are living and working in the community.
We just thought you'd like to know.
[ Sources: EU Commission statement on EU-Turkey deal yesterday, plus numerous EU official documents regarding this deal - Journalists and politicians can contact us for the full list of links, as usual. ] 06.00am, 13 Jan 2017
MERKEL’S €3 BILLION “EU” GIFT TO TURKEY’S PRESIDENT ERDOGAN
9 months on, how is it going?
Yesterday the EU Commission gave an update on the €3 billion ‘Turkey Fund’ negotiated by Angela Merkel with President Erdogan of Turkey in an attempt to slow down the worst effects of her ruinous policy which she announced in 2015.
Last year, negotiations between Mrs Merkel and Mr Erdogan resulted in the entire EU Council agreeing to a €3 billion EU fund for Turkey, in return for President Erdogan slowing the influx of refugees to the EU.
What is less well-reported is how this money was provided.
The EU Commission confirmed in a statement yesterday that “This is made up of €1 billion from the EU budget, and €2 billion from the EU Member States.”
So, €2 billion from the member states is in addition to the normal EU contributions
The UK’s proportion is approximately 12%
So this means an extra €240 million provided by the UK taxpayer
This is on top of the money provided by the UK direct to Syrian camps – higher than any other country except the US
It’s also on top of the €120 million which the EU allocated from the UK’s ‘normal’ annual EU contributions
It’s also on top of the EU’s emergency financial assistance to Greece and Italy for migrants
The EU confirmed yesterday that “All Member States have sent in their contribution certificates for the €2 billion they pledged.” They also confirmed that the fund’s allocations for “humanitarian and non-humanitarian actions now stands at €2.2 billion”. Further allocations are expected in the coming months.
As of November 2016, only 2217 migrants had been resettled under the mechanism agreed with Turkey.
[ Sources: EU Commission statement on EU-Turkey deal yesterday, numerous EU official documents regarding this deal - Journalists and politicians can contact us for the full list of links, as usual. ] 06.15am, 13 Jan 2017
FACTS4EU.ORG : FACTS AND ORIGINAL ANALYSIS FOR BREXIT
HOW THE BRITISH PUBLIC CONTINUE TO BE DECEIVED
Some Remainer lies are subtle. Some are blatant. All are relentless.
PART ONE - THE SINGLE MARKET EXPOSED
“Yes, people voted to leave, but no-one voted to make the country poorer”
Variants on this are trotted out daily by Brexit-denying MPs and commentators. The public are then told that no-one voted to leave the Single Market or the Customs Union. They are further told that leaving either of these would mean economic disaster for businesses, people’s jobs, and the country.
None of this is true.
Just one example of current Remain lies. Leaving the Single Market was clear, as confirmed by the official Leave campaign, and the Government & official Remain campaign.
Here are some basic facts which Brexit MPs and commentators need to keep repeating.
The Single Market isn’t a market, it’s about politics, rules, and centralised power
The UK will still trade with EU countries after leaving the EU – even without a deal
Over 160 countries trade with the EU - without membership of the Single Market
In many ways the Single Market IS the EU: bureaucratic, dictatorial, and dysfunctional
After 25 years, it still doesn’t work – ‘unfinished and stalled’ [Major OECD report, 2016]
It determines what we produce, how we work, and what we can buy
It’s in 31,500 EU legal documents, so it’s an integral part of EU membership [Eur-Lex database]
The UK’s growth rate has slowed since 1992 when the Single Market started [ONS data]
Only 3.6% of UK businesses use the Single Market anyway [Stronger In website]
The Single Market comes with unlimited immigration and subjection to EU laws.
It doesn’t work and creates costs for 96.4% of UK businesses which don’t use it.
The British people voted to leave this behind, to be independent, and to go global.
To say anything else is a deliberate attempt to deceive and manipulate.
You, dear reader, are in a small minority. You know details about the Single Market and Customs Union because you read sites like this one. However the majority of people in the country receive their information from the TV. We need to keep the facts and the messages simple and we need to repeat them.
We’re perfectly capable of producing long and nuanced pieces. This is what most Leave organisations do. We know we’ve simplified things above but we have detailed, official facts to back up our assertions. It’s our opinion that pro-Brexit MPs and organisations must counter the simplistic falsehoods appearing on TV daily. Currently we don’t believe the right information is getting across to the public.
Tomorrow we will look at the four so-called freedoms. We will prove that they are not sacrosanct in the EU and never have been.
[ Sources: Office of National Statistics GDP growth figures, OECD Report on Single Market, Eur-Lex EU Legal Database, Stronger In Official Remain Campaign Website. Journalists please contact us and we'll send you the links. ] 04.45am, 10 Jan 2017
Some Remainer lies are subtle. Some are blatant. All are relentless.
A FACTS4EU.ORG 6-PART SERIES – SINGLE MARKET, 4 FREEDOMS, CUSTOMS UNION
INTRODUCTION TO THE ‘FOUR FREEDOMS’
Yesterday we looked at the Single Market again, and destroyed its many myths. Today we start looking at the ‘Four Freedoms’. Or as we call it, the myth of ‘Four Legs Good’.
Prick an EU politician or apparatchik and he or she will immediately launch into a misty-eyed soliloquy about ‘Europe’. In fact ‘Europe’ is a land-mass of over 50 countries, but the EU has never been shy about exaggerating. They refer of course to the EU’s 28 (soon to be 27) countries.
Mere mistiness around the eyes when speaking about ‘Europe’ will then become a full-blown oscar-winning performance if they are allowed to speak about their cherished ‘four freedoms’. Seasoned performers will even introduce a catch in their throat and a tremor in their voice as they invoke the sacrum of these four holy tenets of the EU religion.
Brexit has introduced a new imperative in recent months. Any talk of the four freedoms is almost always accompanied by impassioned plea for ‘solidarity’ or ‘unity’. The freedoms are said to be inviolable and indivisible. A coded warning for the EU27 to be united against the UK.
So let’s look at this holy mantra of EU-ness : the 'Four Freedoms'.
To what extent do these freedoms exist?
Do they work?
And what benefits have they brought to ordinary British people?
Below we start with the Freedom of Movement of Services. We chose this particular Freedom for no other reason than that the EU issued a statement on this yesterday.
Some Remainer lies are subtle. Some are blatant. All are relentless.
A FACTS4EU.ORG 6-PART SERIES – SINGLE MARKET, 4 FREEDOMS, CUSTOMS UNION
PART TWO – THE ‘FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT OF SERVICES’
"It does not function," admits EU Commission yesterday
Services represent 79% of the British economy, according to the Office of National Statistics. As the EU decided to make statements on the Freedom of Movement of Services yesterday, and as this is an essential part of the UK economy, the British public have the right to know if the EU has delivered any benefits in this area.
The EU Commission released major statements about free movement of services yesterday, 10th January. Here is what the responsible Commissioner, Elżbieta Bieńkowska, had to say :-
"Services represent two thirds of the EU economy and generate 90% of new jobs."
"But the Single Market – this jewel that is all too often taken for granted – does not function properly for services."
"As a result, we miss out on important potential for jobs and growth."
EU Commissioner Elżbieta Bieńkowska
The Single Market started in 1992, and yet the EU Commission declared only yesterday (25 years later) that it ‘does not function properly for services’.
Here's the summary of the ‘Freedom of Movement of Services’ – one of the four fundamental EU ‘freedoms’, from the EU Commission in its statement yesterday:-
"While services represent two thirds of the EU economy and account for some 90% of job creation, the services sector is under-performing. Productivity growth in the sector is low and the rest of the world is catching up. Barriers stop firms from being set up and expanding, and lead to higher prices for consumers and less choice. Moreover, the performance of manufacturing is increasingly linked to the competitiveness of services. Barriers to trade in services in the Single Market are therefore barriers to the competitiveness of EU manufacturing."
The Freedom of Movement of Services – not working after 25 years.
Admitted yesterday by the EU Commission.
So this 'Freedom' isn’t sacrosanct and has never worked.
UK energy and water supplies - why is so much owned by EU companies?
British armed vehicles, courtesy of German industrial production
HOW FREE MOVEMENT OF SERVICES FAILS THE UK ...
... AND BENEFITS OTHER EU COUNTRIES
In the article above we explained how the UK's public procurement is governed by EU Directives. Every country in the EU is supposed to obey these rules.
We thought we’d look at how well each country is doing in fulfilling this obligation.
We reviewed the EU's four key criteria. These are: calling for bids; having more than one bidder; buying in bulk; and not having ‘special reasons’ for awarding a contract. These four key criteria are defined by the EU’s regulations.
Of 28 EU countries, 22 of them fail on one or more of the four key criteria
9 of them fail on 3 or 4 of the criteria
The UK fails on NONE of the four key criteria
While the UK remains a member of the EU, it must strive to obey EU laws and directives. It seems other EU countries are less concerned about these rules.
Now you know why a large part of our water and electricity supplies are owned by the French, why they’re supplying the steel for our new submarines, and why we’re buying our armed vehicles from Germany.
Yesterday Mrs May remained unclear on the shape of Brexit. This is not a characteristic of the EU's leaders.
‘FOUR LEGS GOOD’ - EU’S CHIEF BREXIT NEGOTIATOR
Since June the EU has been clear on its immovable position concerning the ‘four freedoms’
Following the PM’s interview on Sky yesterday, commentators have engaged in another bout of speculation on the government’s Brexit position.
Meanwhile, the EU has been consistent for the last six months. They will not move on the four freedoms of goods, capital, services and people. In a mirror of the message from the tyrannical pig Napoleon in Orwell’s Animal Farm, the EU’s slogan seems to be ‘Four legs good, fewer legs bad’.
"The single market and its four freedoms are indivisible."
"Cherry-picking is not an option."
Michel Barnier, Chief Brexit Negotiatior for the EU, Dec 2016
Thus spake Michel Barnier in his first press conference one month ago.
This message has been reiterated countless times by Chancellor Merkel, President Hollande, President Juncker of the EU Commission, President Schultz of the EU Parliament, and President Tusk of the EU Council.
So adamant have they been, that President Tusk even overreached himself in a post-Summit press conference on 29 June 2016, declaring:
“Leaders made it crystal clear today that access to the single market requires acceptance of all four freedoms, including the freedom of movement. There will be no single market à la carte.”
EU Council President Tusk, 29 June 2016
We pointed out to President Tusk and all the other EU leaders at the time that over 160 countries have access to the single market, without being members of the EU.
THEY ARE SIMPLY WRONG AND ARE DECEIVING THE BRITISH PUBLIC
We intend to publish an article tomorrow, clearly explaining why.
We await decisions from two major campaigning organisations who are considering using the Facts4EU.Org team as their provider of daily Brexit news.
Unfortunately if we don't succeed in finding a regular source of funding, we will have to stop our work.
05.30am, 09 Jan 2017
FACTS AND ORIGINAL ANALYSIS FOR BREXIT
Good news for the UK, more bad news for the EU
Not a good time to be EU Commission President?
THE EU’S LATEST NEWS YOU WON’T SEE ON THE BBC
Retail sales up in UK, but down in the Eurozone and down in the EU27
(Yes, we know that retail sales figures aren’t sexy
but please read on)
As they so often do on Fridays, the EU’s statistics body sneaked out some excellent economic figures for the UK but bad news for the rest of the EU, particularly Germany.
The latest figures from Eurostat show that the UK had
The highest retail sales growth of any major EU economy in November
Alas, this positive news for Brexit Britain didn’t quite make it onto the BBC’s news, nor on Sky’s. Nor has the British government mentioned it in any press announcement.
However here at Facts4EU.Org we thought you’d like to know.
We don’t expect figures like these to be headline news – they’re not. But if the BBC, Sky and ITV don’t even report them as a small item, and instead deliver relentlessly negative news to the public, is it any wonder that people lack confidence about Brexit?
This is why we kept going on June 24th, when other Leave campaign organisations were nursing hangovers and thinking the job was done. The attempted brainwashing of the public didn’t stop with the vote.
Even if we have to stop operations due to insufficient funding, we hope you will continue the fight to ensure that the United Kingdom truly does free itself from the yoke of elitist and corporatist control by the EU’s army of self-serving bureaucrats and politicians.
The Bank of England laughs off its catastrophic and politically-motivated economic forecasts prior to the Referendum
Bank Governor Mark Carney
Politicians lambasted the Bank of England at the time
“IT’S A FAIR COP” SAYS BANK OF ENGLAND
This was the closest the Bank of England has come to apologising for its catastrophic pre-Referendum forecasts
In a 1-hour Q&A with the Institute for Government on Thursday, the Bank of England’s Chief Economist Andrew ‘Andy’ Haldane was questioned on the Bank’s completely erroneous assessment of the outcome of a Leave vote.
Questioner: “You forecast a hurricane. We haven’t had one.”
Response by Andy Haldane, Chief Economist of the Bank of England :
“It’s a fair cop”
“It’s almost as though the Referendum hadn’t taken place”
“It’s pretty much business as usual”
“The spending power in people’s pockets was not materially dented during the course of last year”
In the video clip below you will note that the Bank of England’s Chief Economist didn’t attempt to deny that they had forecast ‘a hurricane’. Instead he tried to joke and rationalise it away.
Copyright Institute For Government 2017
Important: The best five minutes about Brexit starts at 20 minutes and 10 seconds
This is serious. The Bank is still seen by many people as independent and authoritative. Their pronouncements affected the way people voted.
The Bank’s interventions – specifically those of Governor Mark Carney – were seen as being overtly political and part of the government’s attempts to frighten people into voting Remain. These were widely condemned at the time, with some leading politicians including Jacob Rees-Mogg, Nigel Farage, and John Redwood all calling for the Governor to fall on his sword. Facts4EU.Org wrote several pieces calling for the Governor to go.
We remain of the view that the Governor’s position is untenable. We further believe that some very strict guidelines need to be formulated for the future behaviour of the central bank’s senior management.
Never again may they be allowed to act as a political body and as a mouthpiece for the Establishment.
We've used Bank of England data to disprove the final lie from the Remainers
Former Minister John Redwood MP gives exclusive reaction to Facts4EU.Org
THE FINAL REMAIN MYTH DEBUNKED
The Pound was falling from 2½ years ago – nothing to do with Brexit
Economic news since the Referendum has been far better than Remain’s ‘Experts’ predicted. The only thing Remainers fall back on in every TV interview is the drop in the Pound – but figures show that even this is another complete misrepresentation.
On 1st July 2014, 30 months ago, the Pound was worth $1.71 US dollars
Today the Pound is worth $1.23 US dollars
The simple fact is that the Pound has dropped 39% in the last 30 months
This fall started long before Mr Cameron agreed to hold the Referendum
Facts4EU.Org spoke exclusively to former Cabinet Minister John Redwood MP about our research.
Dr Redwood has consistently written about this subject in an effort to present facts clearly to the public. He told us:
“The pound started to fall well before the referendum was a news item. The pound reached a low in April 2016 against the Euro and is not much lower today after the vote. It is wrong to keep blaming the vote for the fall. The dollar has been strong against all currencies because the US is putting up its interest rates.“
John Redwood, commenting exclusively to Facts4EU.Org
Here's a reminder of the other wild claims of the Remainers which have proved to be untrue:-
Immediate recession – No, the UK remains the fastest-growing major economy
Immediate job losses – No, unemployment rate is now down to 4.8%
Emergency budget, 2p on income tax – No, this never happened
Collapse in investment – No, foreign investment in the UK has continued
Immediate rise in prices – No, shop prices are lower than a year ago
Daily Express Online makes Facts4EU.Org's story their top Brexit news item
How Facts4EU.Org makes the news
FACTS4EU’S STORY TOPS NATIONAL DAILY’S BREXIT NEWS
Daily Express runs with our exclusive story on €5bn EU funding for Africa & MidEast in 15 days
On Dec 22nd we ran an original article showing how the EU had splashed €5 billion (£4.2 billion) of taxpayers’ money to 15 countries in just 15 days, primarily to try to solve Mrs Merkel’s immigration problem.
Our piece was meticulously researched from official sources as usual:
Based on original news story from Facts4EU.Org, 22 Dec
This Daily Express article by Nick Gutteridge is excellent and he fleshes out the story with additional information about the corruption within the governments to whom the EU is providing this funding.
This is just one current example of how Facts4EU.Org has contributed significantly in shaping the Brexit debate, and in enlightening the public about the EU and why the UK was right to vote to leave.
Please forgive this self-promotion, but for some weeks we have been trying to persuade a number of major Brexit organisations to fund our work this year. We originally tried when the Referendum campaign started, but to no avail, so our Editor funded over 90% of our work.
In November and December we tried again.
Without a serious donor we can’t continue, as the funds of our founder are now exhausted. Unfortunately the kind and generous donations from members of the public represent only 10% of what is needed.
The Facts4EU.Org news team is available to any serious pro-Brexit organisation which sees the value in a daily diet of original news researched from official sources. We’re happy to operate under the branding of that organisation.
We have no big egos about our name and reputation – we simply want to ensure that the message gets out there, that the public is increasingly happy with its majority decision, and that the UK will truly leave the EU.
How the absence of real facts explains Remainer opinions
Yesterday we wrote an opinion piece about the way the British people were lied to during 2016. The peoples of the other EU member states suffer from propaganda in the same way, but are currently less aware of it than an increasing number of British people.
Migration is in the news on a daily basis, so we’ve picked this as an example. The EU Commission has regularly been producing news releases in recent months reassuring everyone that things are under control. Here are a couple of graphs we’ve produced, based on official figures, which tell a different story.
2 big EU countries, 2 sets of surprising and important facts
(Exclusive to this site, as usual.)
This shows only migrants who applied for asylum in Germany in 2016 - a 79.2% increase on 2015. It doesn’t show those who avoided this because they knew they would never be approved. These figures are the latest for 2016 – they do not include 2015 asylum applications.
Over 90% of migrants to Italy were from Africa. This shows the fallacy of the argument that migrants are all desperate people escaping from war-torn Syria. In Italy, 2016 saw an increase in migrants of 17%, despite the optimistic press releases of the EU Commission.
Please click on the graphs to enlarge.
We also have figures on the increasing number of migrants who are requesting to go back to their country of origin and taking large payments from EU member states for doing so. If they became migrants because they were fleeing in fear of their lives, why are they wanting to go home?
We could have picked from hundreds of examples, to demonstrate how important it is to have some real facts. The graphs above are about specific aspects of the migration problem, from two large EU countries. They merely give a flavour of what is really happening.
It’s no wonder that so many people who voted Remain continue to believe completely erroneous information which they’re receiving from a variety of other sources.
In 2016 we aimed to be a beacon of truth, to help in overcoming the deception of so many people.
Ah well, at least we tried. Happy New Year to you all!
President Hollande's swansong New Year's message to his nation
THE EU’S BRAVE NEW WORLD, 2017
Troops on the streets, Islamic terrorism dominating, Brexit weighing heavy
At the time of writing it appears that the EU’s member states avoided another terrorist atrocity last night, although of course EU candidate country Turkey was less fortunate with a terrible attack in Istanbul which left 39 dead. Across the EU, hundreds of thousands of police and soldiers were deployed.
The New Year speeches by the leaders of the EU’s three largest countries (excluding the UK) made grim reading:-
German Chancellor Angela Merkel - Brexit is a "heavy blow"
Mrs Merkel wailed about the ‘cruel mockery’ of the migrants who committed terrorist offences despite her ‘helping spirit’.
“Doubtless the most difficult trial is Islamist terrorism, which has been setting its sights on Germany for years now”
“And yes, it is especially bitter and detestable when terrorist attacks are committed by people who came to our country claiming to seek protection, people whom our country was eager to help for this reason, and who have now made a cruel mockery of this helping spirit through their deeds”
On Brexit : “Yes, Europe is slow. It is onerous. It has to weather heavy blows like the departure of one of its Member States.”
French President Francois Hollande - Brexit demonstrates threat to "democracy, freedom, social rights, Europe and even peace"
In his final New Year’s message to the French people, Monsieur Hollande clutched at straws on security and the economy.
On the streets, tens of thousands of soldiers were deployed in addition to the regular police and elite SWAT and Riot police.
“I also understand your continuing anxiety in the face of this terrorist threat that isn’t weakening”
On Brexit : “What we sometimes believed we had acquired forever - democracy, freedom, social rights, Europe and even peace - all this becomes vulnerable, reversible. We saw it in the United Kingdom with the Brexit”
Italian President Sergio Mattarella
“The presence of many migrants in our country has increased a sense of insecurity”
The Italian President described unemployment as “problema numero uno”, in particular amongst the young.
“Combatting unemployment and, with it, the poverty of many families is a goal to be pursued with determination”
“After the explosion of international terrorism of Islamic origin, the presence of many migrants in our country has increased a sense of insecurity”
No-one is saying that the EU wouldn’t have had a problem with Islamic terrorism if Angela Merkel hadn’t thrown the doors open wide in 2015. However many people across Europe, including within her coalition government, are now openly saying that her policies must be reversed.
We can expect 2017 to be a year when politicians of all persuasions across the EU are forced to row back on their disastrous policies of recent years. However if you’re hoping for any admissions of guilt or apologies, you could be in for a very long wait.
We have researched and published some excellent reports in previous months
Please use the news archive menu at the top of the right-hand-column of this page to access them.
"O BREXIT, MY BREXIT !"
Have you had your say yet? This is rapidly becoming one of our most popular pages. Your chance to describe to Ministers the Brexit you voted for.
5 simple questions - Read the opinions on the new 'O Brexit, My Brexit !' page and then submit your thoughts.
Facts4EU.Org Dec 2016
We rely on donations from the Public and from sympathetic benefactors.
Please read our 'Help Needed' page for details.
Facts4eu.org is non party-political and not supported by any Leave campaign.
We present facts we've researched from official government and EU sources.
Now that the Referendum has been won, we have 2 main aims:
1. To provide bullet-pointed and factual summaries of key points, to help people to ensure Brexit is delivered in full.
2. Crucially, to allow MPs and campaigners to give reliable and consistent facts to the public.
Please don't hesitate to contact the Editors if you can volunteer in some way, and particularly if you can support us financially.
NEUTRALITY: Facts4eu.org focuses on information which shows that the UK is better off regaining its independence and growing globally. The entire weight of the Establishment is promoting the opposite case, so this site is just one small voice trying to redress the balance.