The newly-proclaimed president of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Junker who took over from our very own Sr Barroso, is coming under increasing pressure over the tax arrangements he allowed with he was the Luxembourg premier.
His record was set upon and denounced by MEPs in the European parliament, including some from the UK, France and Italy. All of the 28 new European commissioners had to attend the session for the censure motion.
He is believed to have facilitated massive corporate tax avoidance schemes during his nearly two decades in power so that multinational corporations could minimise tax despite raking in billions elsewhere in the EU.
Mr Junker became president at the beginning of November and is due to head the EU’s executive for the coming five years.
He sought to distance himself from the scandal by saying he was “no friend of big capital”.
He went on in an attempt to share the trouble by saying the “problem is not peculiarly Luxembourg, it is Europe” and blamed the tax avoidance scandal on the reluctance of national governments to harmonise corporate tax rates.
The details of Luxembourg’s record as a tax avoidance haven were given flesh in 28,000 leaked documents that revealed how the authorities, headed by Juncker, made agreements with more than 300 global companies for tax minimisation.
Mr Juncker added: “If you want me to go, say so and I will leave.”
However, the censure motion, which goes to a vote on Thursday, is not likely to get the two-thirds support it needs to pass as the two largest political groups still support Mr Juncker.
One of the few politicians from Luxembourg who spoke out against the tax schemes was Luc Dockendorf, a diplomat with the United Nations.
He and the historian Benoît Majerus wrote: “We’ve been living at the expense of others. Not just other states, but other people, like ourselves, who have been paying their taxes, while corporations in their own countries have been dodging them. It is no longer possible to pretend that the Luxembourgish model has no negative consequences for other countries.”
Comments
'It is important that the British, who have been part of all the great intra-European wars since the 16th century, remain part of the great peace project that is the European Union,' he said.
'Besides, their presence is important in terms of political equilibrium at the heart of the European Union, including relations between the great countries.'
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2850445/European-Union-dead-without-France-survive-Britain-heads-exit-door-says-Van-Rompuy.html#ixzz3KCIMP6zJ
Makes your chest puff out with pride ! Us .. those psychotically violent animals - the Brits; yes and I even include you hiding behind the sofa during a Dr.Who - have actually helped steer Europe over the centuries.
Yet some still call us British --- bad Europeans ?
Having battled hard to give our oldest ally a 2nd / 3rd / 4th - ad infinitum .... chance in the EU?
This vote of censure will fail because it is brought by the right-wingers including UKIP. They can muster only about 10% of the votes of the European Parliament. Cameron opposed the appointment of Juncker, which probably means that practically everybody else supports him.
Juncker will succeed in having his cake and eating it too. He avoids the real question which is, if he is such a good European, and fit to be President of the European Commission, why did he not alter the Luxembourg arrangements when he was Prime MInister?
Few Portuguese have the slightest inkling that putting Barroso allegedly at the EC helm was specifically to bring Portugal into the European Union. That hitherto it had been noticeable for avoiding being 'Unionised'.
Aiming to overcome Portugal's neurotic tendencies which amazingly bundle amongst much else - xenophobia (fear of other races) with racism (hatred of other races).
Not an ideal mix for any country that claims to be in a union with other member states.
And true enough having Barroso as President of the EC changed nothing in Portugal. The corruption, tax avoidance, misuse of office, misuse of public funds and general sleaziness goes far too deep and has been going on for far too long.
So now we have this endless procession of 'bad news' stories. Probes and investigations driven by outside interests, many re-visiting allegations that should have been properly investigated in previous years. But which were as always noticeably ignored or trivialised.
As they had to be to protect the interests of the 'wrongdoers' !!!