Taxpayers money going North?

silverharp

Listening to RTE Radio 1 this morning about the North talks and got the impression that Irish Officials "wont be found wanting" when it comes to money to help a deal in the North. Any idea what and how much they are talking about?
I am all for cross boarder development but only if the cheque book stops at the boarder.

gandalf

Heard this on newstalk as well this morning but no mention of the story anywhere. I find this incredible. If they don't pay taxes into our economy then they shouldn't be getting hand outs from us.

Northern Ireland needs to wean itself off state handouts as it is. State investment makes up a disporportionate percentage of their economy.

Here are a few fact nicked from Wikipedia

• The public sector accounts for 63% of the economy of Northern Ireland, which is substantially higher than 43% of the United Kingdom as a whole
• In total, the British government subvention totals £5,000m, or 20% of Northern Ireland's economic output

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Northern_Ireland

mike65

Why should anyone be suprised at either the notion or the fact Dermot Ahern will write cheques till the cows come home and expect no-one down here to raise an eyebrow?

As pointed out above NI has cash coming out of its ears but being wasted on employing an army of public servants, may I suggest they re-focus spending on infrastucture first.

Mike.

Flukey

Taxpayers money goes everywhere, so there is nothing particularly unusual about this. Cross-border activity will necessitate that. Plenty of money comes south too, in many ways. From this simplest things like people buying things when they come across the border, to larger projects. This has more positive benefits in the long term. An All-Ireland approach to lots of things will benefit everyone, and that will require investment. That in itself will help change the situation in the North where so much money is going into the public areas, and promote enterprise.

bik_ireland

gandalf wrote:

Heard this on newstalk as well this morning but no mention of the story anywhere. I find this incredible. If they don't pay taxes into our economy then they shouldn't be getting hand outs from us.

Northern Ireland needs to wean itself off state handouts as it is. State investment makes up a disporportionate percentage of their economy.

Here are a few fact nicked from Wikipedia

• The public sector accounts for 63% of the economy of Northern Ireland, which is substantially higher than 43% of the United Kingdom as a whole
• In total, the British government subvention totals £5,000m, or 20% of Northern Ireland's economic output

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Northern_Ireland

And who exactly is reponsible for PUTTING the 6 counties into the situation where they NEED that level of subvention?
The north can only start to begin to recover, not only politically and culturally, but economically - after re-unification - and even then - after many years of stability. We in the south abandoned the north in 1922 - having given solemn promise to continue to struggle for british withdrawal from the remainder of the country. You cannot blame the north for issues beyond their control.

flogen

I'm sure plenty of taxpayers money has gone North before, directly or indirectly.

Yes the NI economy is in a bad shape and relies on the British Government to prop it up, however the catch 22 is that more public money is probably needed to encourage private investment.
The debate should focus on how the money is being spent, not where... after all you can throw money at a problem and it won't get fixed or you could spend some money and a lot of time and come out with the ideal results.

Nuttzz

i had a laugh at this, some here might remember the Anglo Irish Argreement in 85, I remember the unionists on RTE (today tonight) telling us how we (the south) could never afford to pay for the north and what a great economic success it was, now 20 years later......

mike65

Yep I recall those days. They were right at the time don't forget!

Mike.

philologos

gandalf wrote:

Heard this on newstalk as well this morning but no mention of the story anywhere. I find this incredible. If they don't pay taxes into our economy then they shouldn't be getting hand outs from us.

Northern Ireland needs to wean itself off state handouts as it is. State investment makes up a disporportionate percentage of their economy.

Here are a few fact nicked from Wikipedia

• The public sector accounts for 63% of the economy of Northern Ireland, which is substantially higher than 43% of the United Kingdom as a whole
• In total, the British government subvention totals £5,000m, or 20% of Northern Ireland's economic output

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Northern_Ireland

so basically you are saying there is less enterprise in Northern Ireland than there is in mainland UK?

gandalf

Jakkass wrote:

so basically you are saying there is less enterprise in Northern Ireland than there is in mainland UK?

No basically what the stats are saying is the NI economy is based mainly on state handouts via public services jobs.

BTW in the Republic of Ireland the state sector accounts for 36% of our economy. There is no way in its present form NI can ever join with us. If they did the job losses in the Public Sector would be extreme.

philologos

If more business was set up surely it would make more people join the private sector in time though.

fly_agaric

flukey wrote:

Taxpayers money goes everywhere, so there is nothing particularly unusual about this

:eek: The UK is wealthy and powerful. They certainly do not need our tax money. I really hope it is not anything more than a pathetic token for some idiotic woolly projects to do with "the North":rolleyes: . But any money at all is probably too much IMO!

Nuttzz

Jakkass wrote:

If more business was set up surely it would make more people join the private sector in time though.

give up a cushy public sector job for one in the private sector :eek: that will happen!

@Mike: we could never afford it they told us, now look at all the yellow regs on buliding sites

Zebra3

Afaik the Irish government has also put money into Derry airport recently as it is used by people from Donegal.

Ironic to see people complain about it though after the billions that flowed from Europe. And why shouldn't the government spend money on services for Irish citizens? Maybe we should cut off any payments being made to groups who look after poor emigrants abroad. Don't you just hate those leeches who don't pay tax here. :rolleyes:

Maybe we can also cut off services to those millionaires who live here and don't pay tax either. :eek:

silverharp

Zebra3 wrote:

Ironic to see people complain about it though after the billions that flowed from Europe.

I don't think this is a fair comparison, The EEC was based on a transfer of funds from from rich countries to poorer countries. In this case it would be a transfer of money from a supossidly rich country (IRL) to an even richer one (UK).
Given that some kids here are going to school in portacabins I think it would be an a act of hubris on behalf of the gov. to commit significant funds to NI. Most people in NI have access to health and education facilites that alot of people here can only dream of.

mike65

Its great to be Northern Irish is'nt it? Money thrown at you from EU, UK and Ireland and a bit fom the USA to boot! No wonder so much of it is apparantly squandered.

Mike.

Zebra3

silverharp wrote:

Given that some kids here are going to school in portacabins I think it would be an a act of hubris on behalf of the gov. to commit significant funds to NI.

Given that some kids here are going to school in portacabins I think it would be an act of hubris on behalf of the gov. to commit significant funds to the richest people in Ireland in the form of generous tax breaks.

Imagine the outcry if that happened... :rolleyes:

Glenbhoy

gandalf wrote:

If they don't pay taxes into our economy then they shouldn't be getting hand outs from us.

But then maybe they do pay taxes into our economy - have you driven north in the past decade? If so, you might realise that there is barely a petrol station within 40 miles of the border on the northern side - that's a big whack of excise duty and VAT there.
Then there's the gaa, how many times in recent years have the nordies embarked en-masse to Dublin for games, filling croker and her surrounding pubs, not to mention parking fees and clamp release fees.
What about tourism, not just the annual week in Galway or Killarney, but what about the thousands of nordies who make the fortnightly drive to Donegal to their holiday home (yeah, stamp duty paid, VAT paid, propping up the local construction industry)?
Then we have the thousands of nordies who come down here to work, educated by all that public money thats been squandered by them, but now, contributing to this economy.
But maybe you're right, we shouldn't be giving them feckers anything.

gandalf

So is it one way through the border then? I believe the hordes of shoppers from the republic decending on Newry is a sight to behold.

Until they can live together and cut down on their dependency on handouts then yes we shouldn't give them a thing.

Dalfiatach

gandalf wrote:

Until they can live together and cut down on their dependency on handouts then yes we shouldn't give them a thing.

The second bit isn't really the fault of the people of the north though: that's the way it has always been run by Britain. NI has been subsidised from the day it was born. The old Stormont Regime gradually ran the economy into the ground and all the old traditional industry was in terminal decline by the early 1960s, but London just kept on handing over the dosh without complaint, or without any effort to force Old Stormont to adopt forward-looking economic policies. In fact the economic situation was a critical factor in the rise in community tension in the late 60s, as the old contract between political Unionism and the Loyalist working class "vote for us and we'll give you jobs for life in the shipyards/ropeworks/textiles" could no longer be honoured with a decreasing pool of jobs: and at the same time you had the first post-Butler generation of educated Catholics also chasing what jobs there were.

London has been in sole control of the northern economy since 1973 and have done sfa to manage the finances and economy responsibly. We're 12 years into the Peace Process (TM) and still not a single sign of London making any real effort to create and encourage a proper economy. And even if the Assembly was up and running, it has no powers whatsoever to do much of anything in this regard: all fiscal powers are firmly reserved for London.

So, seeing as London clearly has no interest in running the place properly, the local politicians don't have the powers to make changes even if they were working together: who do you suppose will fix the situation?

Look on it as an investment. The southern border counties don't pay their own way either, because of the distorting effects of the border. But put decent cross-border infrastructure in place, and encourage a bit of FDI that was coming our way to locate in the border region, and you could have much increased private industry creating real wealth all across Donegal, west Derry & Tyrone, Fermanagh, Leitrim, S Armagh, S Down, Louth, Cavan, Monaghan. The southern counties become more prosperous and less of a drain on our finances, the northern economy is greatly improved with significant re-balancing away from welfare/public-sector dependancy, and ordinary Unionists living in the border region see the practical benefits of cooperation, economic responsibility and self-rule instead of antagonism and dependancy: benefits they've never had from British rule.

The north isn't going to magically float away into the Atlantic you know. We have to make the best of the situation and do what we can to minimise the negative effects of Partition. Yes, you might think it unfair that we have to clean up the mess of others, but hey - life's not fair. Would you rather have a reasonably stable, prosperous and wealth-creating North on your doorstep; or an unstable unbalanced handout junkie liable to erupt into violence at any time?

silverharp

Glenbhoy wrote:

But then maybe they do pay taxes into our economy ......But maybe you're right, we shouldn't be giving them feckers anything.

Your logic is flawed, countries don’t get rebates for trade imbalances with other countries, on that basis we should pay for new infrastructure tobe built in Germany cos of all the money we get from German tourists.


Deals should be done but on a business basis, if it is cheaper for people in Donegal to access Health services over the border, then fine,let the HSE come up with a scheme. Shared electricity, cool. If the british gov are dragging their heals on funding the M1 up to Belfast then let the NTMA fund it as a toll road.

Deals done on any other basis will be wasteful and will do nothing to win unionist support

Glenbhoy

silverharp wrote:

Your logic is flawed, countries don’t get rebates for trade imbalances with other countries, on that basis we should pay for new infrastructure tobe built in Germany cos of all the money we get from German tourists.

I did not say that at all, my response was based on a statement by Gandalf saying that "If they don't pay taxes into our economy then they shouldn't be getting hand outs from us", I was merely pointing out that they do in fact pay considerable amounts of tax into this economy, therefore, using Gandalf's logic, they should be getting handouts from us.

Gandalf wrote:

So is it one way through the border then? I believe the hordes of shoppers from the republic decending on Newry is a sight to behold.

Until they can live together and cut down on their dependency on handouts then yes we shouldn't give them a thing.

No, the commerce is not one way, however I believe the value and regularity of purchases made south of the border far exceed the value of purchases in the north. In addition the type of products differ significantly in terms of contribution to the exchequer, eg petrol in the south, the majority of the price is excise duties or vat, whereas no such levies are applied to (what I presume are) the majority of goods sold in the north to southerners.
As for your last statement re their inability to live together, spent much time up there have you??

sceptre

Glenbhoy wrote:

I did not say that at all, my response was based on a statement by Gandalf saying that "If they don't pay taxes into our economy then they shouldn't be getting hand outs from us", I was merely pointing out that they do in fact pay considerable amounts of tax into this economy, therefore, using Gandalf's logic, they should be getting handouts from us.

A implies B doesn't necessarily mean that A is true merely because B is true. Fallacy of the affirmation of the consequent. Sorry to be blunt but logic doesn't get to play the game you'd like it to.

Sleepy

So my taxes are now paying for another country?

Tax revenue being donated to the third world I can accept and fully support but last time I checked, the UK was a first world country.

Glenbhoy

Sleepy wrote:

So my taxes are now paying for another country?

Tax revenue being donated to the third world I can accept and fully support but last time I checked, the UK was a first world country.

Those in glass houses shouldn't throw stones:

Economic and social cohesion: the Union embodies the principle of economic and social cohesion according to which the less prosperous regions are helped to reduce disparities between their levels of development and those of the more prosperous regions. This principle was reinforced in the Single European Act and again in the Maastricht Treatyy. Under the present round ofstructural funds, which will apply until the end of 1999, Ireland will receive funding of approximately £1 billion per year.

http://www.ireland-information.com/reference/european.html

Zebra3

More from today's Indo. and this I find a bit much..

http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ca=9&si=1706336&issue_id=14768

A quarter of the Ulster Scots Agency's annual €3.09m budget is provided by Irish taxpayers.

mm4

This thread is incredible - the reality is totally the opposite; money from the UK's flowing into Ireland - via the EU - at a massive rate "Glenbhoy" mentions it but appears wary of doing so with clarity.

Ireland is the biggest recipient of EU money - it is one of only four countries which are net-recipients. In terms of cash per head, the funding in 2003 to a net receipt of €391.70 for each Irish national. The UK is a net donor to the EU, UK taxpayers are making a significant contribution to that figure.

http://www.finfacts.ie/comment/irelandeunetreceiptsbenefits.htm

This won't carry on for much longer - and it has been a good investment for the UK - much better to have rich happy neighbours.

mike65

OT but this state has received 30 billion euro in all programmes from the EU since joining. Also as some may know, a billion of the next National Development Plan is going to NI. It looks like this state is, bit-by-bit taking over Norn Iron.

Mike.

silverharp

mm4 wrote:

This thread is incredible - the reality is totally the opposite; money from the UK's flowing into Ireland - via the EU - at a massive rate "Glenbhoy" mentions it but appears wary of doing so with clarity.

"via the EU" is a very important phrase and is completly different to this situation. When I voted for the Agreement I didn't think I was signing up to shared financial responsibilty for NI. Both sides up there have it in there heads that if they are awkward enough gov. will get out the cheque books. This is a bad start. The DUP have nothing but contempt for this country and no amount of goodwill here will make any difference.

A Dub in Glasgo

silverharp wrote:

"via the EU" is a very important phrase and is completly different to this situation. When I voted for the Agreement I didn't think I was signing up to shared financial responsibilty for NI. Both sides up there have it in there heads that if they are awkward enough gov. will get out the cheque books. This is a bad start. The DUP have nothing but contempt for this country and no amount of goodwill here will make any difference.

What is 'completely different'?

The fact is that non-RoI taxpayers have pumped huge amount of money into the RoI to ensure that the RoI has a basic standard of infrastructure. Are you against contributing to the NI economy because it is not done via the EU?

fly_agaric

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

What is 'completely different'?

It was hardly as if all the EU monies we got came from the UK. I think France, and especially Germany paid more didn't they?
Also, when we joined the EU we were alot poorer and more backward compared to these wealthy countries than NI is compared to us.
We are only just now getting to the point where our infrastructure may match theirs and public services are still worse.
In addtion Ireland is not a > trillion dollar economy of (at least) 60 million people as all the EU paymasters are while NI is actually small region of one of these rich countries - not an impoverished little fellow EU nation needing help from the likes of us.
So alot of things are different.
We'd be better off giving a billion (if that's the figure being mentioned) in structural funds to Poland IMO. Or maybe Latvia or Lithuania:)

A Dub in Glasgo

It was hardly as if all the EU monies we got came from the UK. I think France, and especially Germany paid more didn't they?
Also, when we joined the EU we were alot poorer and more backward compared to these wealthy countries than NI is compared to us.
We are only just now getting to the point where our infrastructure may match theirs and public services are still worse.
In addtion Ireland is not a > trillion dollar economy of (at least) 60 million people as all the EU paymasters are while NI is actually small region of one of these rich countries - not an impoverished little fellow EU nation needing help from the likes of us.
So alot of things are different.

I am sorry for labouring the point, what is different? You say a lot of things are different, yet I cannot see them.

You seem to be against putting any money into NI because you see NI as part of a rich country? Do you prefer to put that money into Romania or Poland? The fact still remains that the RoI is a net receiver of EU funds and the UK is a net contributer of EU funds. I would say that a lot of the non-RoI money that was pumped into the RoI economy came from the UK. If the EU recommended putting money into NI, would you object that RoI money may go to NI?

fly_agaric

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

You say a lot of things are different, yet I cannot see them.

I thought my post covered the differences quite well.

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

Do you prefer to put that money into Romania or Poland?

They need it more than NI does.

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

If the EU recommended putting money into NI, would you object that RoI money may go to NI?

No, I wouldn't. The scenario of NI getting funding from the EU which "we" as well as others had paid into is much better. Let the EU deal with it. BTW I'm surprised we are still getting so much EU money. I think I have read somewhere that we will finally become a net contributer to it during this (EU) budget??--->

(Yes - http://www.finfacts.com/comment/irelandeunetreceiptsbenefits.htm [posted above])

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

I would say that a lot of the non-RoI money that was pumped into the RoI economy came from the UK.

As already mentioned, that link gives figures which show the net per person contributions of the countries to the EU budget in 2003. UK is in the middle of the bunch of "givers" by this metric.
Germany is giving at twice the rate per capita and since its population is AFAIR 1/3 bigger than the UK's...:) - I think we owe them much more gratitude! Over twice as much. (France gives less per capita and must give less in total since populations are similar.)

I'd just like to say that if this money for NI is to be spent on things which are of use to "us" too I would be less negative about it. We will have to see I suppose.
(The govt. here telling the DUP, Sf etc exactly what projects it will be spent on will not go down too well in NI I think...)

silverharp

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

I am sorry for labouring the point, what is different? You say a lot of things are different, yet I cannot see them.

This line of thinking is pointless, IF the Irish Gov give the british gov. 1bn to be spent in NI, it won't be connected to past EU handouts or who gave what.

If the money is being given so that the DUP and co. will tolerate catholics about the place, then this is a bad start. I don't even know what the money is needed for. there is low unemployment and good infrastructure there. Handouts rarely create a dynamic economy.

Glenbhoy

fly_agaric wrote:

As already mentioned, that link gives figures which show the net per person contributions of the countries to the EU budget in 2003. UK is in the middle of the bunch of "givers" by this metric.
Germany is giving at twice the rate per capita and since its population is AFAIR 1/3 bigger than the UK's...:) - I think we owe them much more gratitude! Over twice as much. (France gives less per capita and must give less in total since populations are similar.)

I'd just like to say that if this money for NI is to be spent on things which are of use to "us" too I would be less negative about it. We will have to see I suppose.
(The govt. here telling the DUP, Sf etc exactly what projects it will be spent on will not go down too well in NI I think...)

fly_agaric, your argument here is pretty ridiculous, the per capita net contributions have no relevance here. The UK is a net contributor of an absolute amount in excess of any funds given by ROI to NI, hence, it is possible to state that those exact funds came directly from the UK.
Silverharp, your comments are fair enough and I can understand the rationale, hell, i probably agree with them, I don't actually know what these funds will be used for, because i imagine the north is actually much more advanced than ROI in areas such as education, healthcare, transport infrastructure etc. At least, it's the standard of such facilities up there which make me despair so much about the mess that's been made of them down here.

fly_agaric

Glenbhoy wrote:

fly_agaric, your argument here is pretty ridiculous, the per capita net contributions have no relevance here.

If you do not like what I said about per-capita contributions, then reread the bit about Germany and its contributions to the EU's budget. If we are to bow down and thank anyone for the continued EU money we got over the last few years despite our new wealth they should be first in line - not the UK. They deserve 2.7 times as many thankyouverymuchsirs from us based on their total contribution to the budget as the UK - Okay?

Glenbhoy wrote:

The UK is a net contributor of an absolute amount in excess of any funds given by ROI to NI, hence, it is possible to state that those exact funds came directly from the UK.

Forgive my stupidity and "ridiculous" arguments but does it not make more sense to consider the whole EU "income" got from countries that give rather than take and look at fraction of the UK net-contribution to that (which from the above is ~1/3 of Germany's contribution).
The same fraction of any item of EU expenditure (like giving us money to build infrastructure) is then funded by the UK.
Giving money to us is not the only thing the EU does.
Maybe the actual value of that fraction is at present still greater than what we would be giving to NI (maybe I'll work it out later)?
It definitely won't be when we start contributing to the EU.

I don't see why transfers from the EU we are got in the past or even the ones we are getting right now mean we now somehow "owe" the UK and must do our bit to help pay for upkeep of the corner of this island their past rulers really, really wanted to hang onto.

Glenbhoy wrote:

I don't actually know what these funds will be used for, because i imagine the north is actually much more advanced than ROI in areas such as education, healthcare, transport infrastructure etc.

Then please do explain the reasons why Ireland should give NI a bilion Euro?

Glenbhoy

fly_agaric wrote:

Forgive my stupidity and "ridiculous points" but does it not make more sense to consider the whole EU "income" and look at fraction of the UK net-contribution to that (which from the above is ~1/3 of Germany's contribution).
The same fraction of any item of EU expenditure (like giving us money to build infrastructure) is then funded by the UK.
Giving money to us is not the only thing the EU does.

My apologies for calling your argument ridiculous and I did not intend for you to take the inference of stupidity.
However, fractions are completely irrelevant here. Do you accept that in absolute terms, the UK has contributed more than 1 bn to the EU since inception (in it's various guises), if you do, then you can see that it is possible to say that, since ROI has received more than 1 bn over the years, that the UK have indirectly given 1bn to ROI and thus this latest transfer to NI is just another step in the transfer from UK to NI.
Anyway, this side of the argument is a bit of a side issue - sorry, but I couldn't help but respond. I presume you can see the validity of our argument, but are choosing to ignore it?

Glenbhoy

fly_agaric wrote:

Then please do explain the reasons why Ireland should give NI a bilion Euro?

I don't think there's any reason - but i don't see why ROI taxpayers should moan about it.

Kashkai

If you cut through all the hype and bull**** about the "Celtic Tiger", we are still a poor country when it comes to infrastructure and services. Therefore, the Republic's government should not be throwing money at the nordies until they sort out our own health service, public transport, roads etc. Even then I'd still have problems with my tax money going up to subsidise that diseased little corner of the world (oh, oh my mask is slipping). Let the lunatics run their own asylum without handouts from the rest of the world.

And as for our own handouts, at least we put the EU's money towards a few decent roads, water treatment plants etc.

Long live the 26 county Republic of Ireland.:D

fly_agaric

Glenbhoy wrote:

My apologies for calling your argument ridiculous and I did not intend for you to take the inference of stupidity.

Okay. Sorry about sounding a bit shrill.

Glenbhoy wrote:

However, fractions are completely irrelevant here.

This is what I don't get.
I know we are getting very very sidetracked - but...

Looking at:
http://www.euractiv.com/en/cap/finances-eu-budget/article-141007*

*the figures in 2nd column should be billions I believe

In our example year of 2003 the "givers" transferred E17.6b net which included E2.8b from the UK.
This is 16 % of the total transfers.
We got E1.6b so one could say the UK transferred us E256million that particular year - not E1.6b. (edited - silly error)

Okay?

Glenbhoy wrote:

Do you accept that in absolute terms, the UK has contributed more than 1 bn to the EU since inception (in it's various guises),

Yes, I do. From the above figures I even accept they have probably transferred about E1b to us through the EU in the last 4-5 years or so.

Glenbhoy wrote:

if you do, then you can see that it is possible to say that, since ROI has received more than 1 bn over the years, that the UK have indirectly given 1bn to ROI and thus this latest transfer to NI is just another step in the transfer from UK to NI.

Yes, the UK has transferred us more than we would ever be giving NI, and no it doesn't follow that we would just be a conduit for their money.
As I was saying arguing above, doesn't Germany actually deserve more credit from us for that EU money. Why single out the UK for our largesse? Should we be making transfers to some E. German employment blackspot areas? But that would be crazy, right?
Basically this whole line of argument [the idea that we would really just be giving back money we got from the UK to one of its regions (NI)] is, to quote Silverharp, pointless.

Glenbhoy wrote:

I don't think there's any reason - but i don't see why ROI taxpayers should moan about it.

If it's not necessary (aka a waste of money), why can't we whinge about it?
We moan plenty when money is wasted on other things - so why not NI? Why is it off limits?
We're not so rich yet that these kind of sums (E1b) are not important.
I don't think the funds we got from the EU were loans from the rich countries, and even if they were, Germany is at the top of the queue.
The money was to help us catch up I suppose, and hopefully, if we don't fall flat on our faces, we'll be doing our bit for E. Europe through the EU in a similar way.

fly_agaric

Looking to http://www.finfacts.ie/comment/irelandeunetreceiptsbenefits.htm again.

That page says we got E34billion from the EU since we joined.
If the 2003 figures are representative, that's E5.4b from the UK and about E14.9b from the Germans and E3.7b from the French. If the money for NI is justified as part of scratching the UK's back for the EU-dosh I feel sorry for poor FrancoGermany...

LordSutch

bik_ireland wrote:

And who exactly is reponsible for PUTTING the 6 counties into the situation where they NEED that level of subvention?
The north can only start to begin to recover, not only politically and culturally, but economically - after re-unification - and even then - after many years of stability. We in the south abandoned the north in 1922 - having given solemn promise to continue to struggle for british withdrawal from the remainder of the country. You cannot blame the north for issues beyond their control.

But we can blame the Provisional IRA for their thirty year campaign which effectively brought the Northern Economy to its knees......
(which is where we are today)! and as for British withdrawl, what do you suggest we do with the one million Brits that live up North?

The IRA tried to exterminate them (didnt work) and now you suggest that we find another way "for them to withdraw" to where exactly?

Glenbhoy

ArthurF wrote:

But we can blame the Provisional IRA for their thirty year campaign which effectively brought the Northern Economy to its knees......
(which is where we are today)! and as for British withdrawl, what do you suggest we do with the one million Brits that live up North?

The IRA tried to exterminate them (didnt work) and now you suggest that we find another way "for them to withdraw" to where exactly?

Very accurate summation there alright Arf:rolleyes: What with NI being that model of social inclusion from 1922 - 1968.

bik_ireland

ArthurF wrote:

But we can blame the Provisional IRA for their thirty year campaign which effectively brought the Northern Economy to its knees......
(which is where we are today)!

Firstly - even if one were to accept your statement in which you claim blame can be laid at the door of the Irish Republican Army (provisional, I presume you mean) - this is STILL not the fault of the entire population of the north. Or even of the entire nationalist population of the north. And while we're on that point - the IRA campaign over that period began as one of protection for nationalists (reluctantly - as Dublin was slow to react at the time of the civil rights campaigns causing the eventual split of the movement) One cannot condemn the IRA for the war it engaged in over that period without fully taking into account many other factors of that era. Would you prefer that they had sat back and done nothing to protect the nationalist population? You know what? Now that I think about that - you might be right! If the IRA had done nothing the nationalists would have eventually all fled south leaving the north free for the unionists to enjoy full economic prosperity.

The IRA tried to exterminate them (didnt work) and now you suggest that we find another way "for them to withdraw" to where exactly?

The IRA never tried to "exterminate" anyone on the basis that they felt they were british. And they should "withdraw" to their own country. I would have thought that point was obvious.

... and as for British withdrawl, what do you suggest we do with the one million Brits that live up North?

If they (I think it's more like 848,000 if you are basing this on religion) believe they are brits they have every right. However - I'm not looking to have them put anywhere. They were born here and have the same rights as any Irish person. By british withdrawal - and I know you know what I mean - I mean withdrawal of british military and the complete return of the north of Ireland to our nation.

LordSutch

I am old enough to remember the beginnings of the troubles (just) and as a teenager I remember well that the Norths economy/ Roads/ Infrastructure/ Retail sector were the envy of many people down here!

I even remember queues of drivers going up North for petrol, and queues of people going North by car & train to do their christmas shopping, because there was little or no retail choice here in the Republic!

As the years went by (early 70s) and the bombs went off on a 'Daily' basis the retail sector & indeed the whole Economy of the North was brought to its knees or at least 'severly retarded' by the constant drip-drip of bombing, Death, & distruction!

And then the Cetic Tiger arrived in the South & the IRA declaired that its War was over in the North ............... better late than never I suppose, but the fact is that the dammage is done and the North's once proud Economy is in tatters (fact)!

So I say yes ~ we should contribute billions to the rebuilding of their economy its the least we can do, and its a great 'Good Will Gesture' just as long as we dont get the impression that a financial package means political interference!

Political interference in their affairs (might = trouble)?

silverharp

ArthurF wrote:

So I say yes ~ we should contribute billions to the rebuilding of their economy its the least we can do, and its a great 'Good Will Gesture' just as long as we dont get the impression that a financial package means political interference!

Political interference in their affairs (might = trouble)?

The Irish state was not responsible for the troubles so I am not sure about the "it's the least we can do argument" you almost imply some collective guilt we should have. Your agument also ignores that NI's economic past was based on sunset industries and was too small an economy to go hi tech in a serious way.

Zebra3

ArthurF wrote:

what do you suggest we do with the one million Brits that live up North?

Can you back that figure up?

fly_agaric

ArthurF wrote:

So I say yes ~ we should contribute billions to the rebuilding of their economy its the least we can do, and its a great 'Good Will Gesture' just as long as we dont get the impression that a financial package means political interference!

Political interference in their affairs (might = trouble)?

Yay! So we'll get to shell out hundreds of millions and, as I also suggested above, the govt. can't even have an input into what it would be spent on (in case the benighted pehpol of Uhlster think the Popish State is trying to subvert their loyal province and some of 'em decide to set matters right with a few well placed suspect devices!).

What a great plan. What a wonderful use of resources....(NOT!)

Glenbhoy and others said the UK funnelled money to Ireland through the EU and we would now be returning some of it to NI. At least there was some oversight/input from the "givers" in the former case. I think the EU had to ok the projects the structural funds were to be spent on and also kept on eye on things to make sure the money was not being squandered. We do that with NI and it will count as "Dublin meddling in the internal affairs of Loyal Uhlster".