The Mail on Sunday’s Robert Verlaik reveals that a wealthy Tory minister earns £2m in EU farm subsidies that his department tried to cover up.
Further proof that it’s cuts only for some. Robert writes:-
"The family of a Government Minister whose department has covered up details of who receives EU farm subsidies has earned £2 million from the same payouts.
Richard Benyon is one of the richest MPs in Parliament. The great-great-grandson of three-times Tory Prime Minister Lord Salisbury, he can trace his ancestry back to William Cecil, the chief political adviser to Elizabeth I.
Tory MP Mr Benyon, the Environment and Fisheries Minister, has received income from a family trust which owns a 20,000-acre estate worth £125 million.
In 2009 alone the family farms were paid nearly £200,000, placing them in the top one per cent of beneficiaries of the EU scheme.
Farming Minister Jim Paice has also received several thousands of pounds in EU subsidies for his farm in Cambridgeshire over the same ten-year period.
Mr Benyon was appointed a Minister at the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) last May. Some time after November the department decided to block all information about how much farmers had earned from subsidies. More than 100,000 British farmers were paid the majority of the £3 billion available in EU farming subsidies for last year.
Ministers argue that they are following advice from Brussels, but freedom of information campaigners claim they have deliberately taken draconian steps to protect rich farmers from public scrutiny.
Labour MP Paul Flynn said that Mr Benyon’s position was unjustifiable. ‘This is wrong in so many ways. How can Ministers benefit from EU payments while at the same time introduce an information-denial policy?
Georgia
A splendid account of the IPU delegation's visit to Georgia has been prepared by the Independent peer Richard Harries who was one of the six man delegation. I agree with all his conclusions. Here is part of the report.
A personal report by Richard Harries
IPU Delegation to Georgia
February 20-24, 2011
Overall a great deal has been achieved in a short period. There are very grave difficulties, but these are being tackled by an able, innovative and optimistic people.
Richard pictured in Georgia at the Jvari mountain monestery
The Russian presence in Abkhazia and South Ossetia
Understandably this was the main theme on the minds of the parliamentarians we met. They were grateful for UK support but strongly urged us to continue to put pressure on the Russians to withdraw, and to support their application to become a member of both the EU and NATO.
A more nuanced approach was put forward by the head of the EU Monitoring Mission, Ambassador Haber. He did not see any fundamental change for the next ten years and stressed that the Georgians must seriously engage with the Abkhazians and South Ossetians. Whilst Russian aspirations in relation to Georgia would not change ( which at the least presumably means decisive influence), they could come to see that this was best achieved with a co-operative Georgia, not a hostile one. This change would be related to a change in attitude within Abkhazia and South Ossetia, who do indeed wish to affirm European values but are held to Russia at the moment by financial considerations.
The importance of keeping non-Russian voices in Abkhazia was also stressed by Brian Faull before we left the UK and by our own embassy in Georgia.
Other members of the delegation, Tory MPs John Whittingdale, Nigel Evans and Mark Reckless
The head of the Foundation for Strategic and International Studies also took a more nuanced approach, contrasting the attitude of the present Georgian Prime Minister, who seemed to think that Georgia’s best interest was served by bad relationship between the USA and Russia,(hence the suggested interest in a Republican win at the next election) with that of the past, which thought Georgia’s best interest was served by a good relationship.
The Georgians are determined to press ahead in their application for EU and NATO membership, and would not be intimidated by Russian opposition.
The development of democracy
A great deal had been achieved, not least elimination of corruption from the police, and the new constitution for 2012. That will mean a shift in power from the President to a Prime Minister elected by parliament. However, significant concerns were expressed.
There is no real ideological difference in parliament between government and opposition, only a small right and centre/right empahasis. The non parliamentary opposition are very divided.
Labour Peer Bill Brett was the other delegation member
The government has effective control of the broadcast media. There are three major channels located off shore, whose ownership is not public. Though there are alternative view points these only have a small share of the audience.
There is a great disparity in political funding. There is no investigative journalism. So, according to critics, there is a “monopoly of political space, a monopoly of economic space and a monopoly of media space”
The judiciary badly needs reforming. At the moment prosecution assumes conviction. Only .1% of those prosecuted are found not guilty. There are 25,000 people in prison, a very high number for the size of the population.
Go for someone who makes you smile because it takes only a smile to make a dark day seem bright.
Posted by: supra shoes | October 17, 2011 at 06:52 PM