.gif){kind=small}
BACK TO HOME
PAGE BACK TO HOME
PAGE EUROPEAN REVIEW
Twelve countries are currently attempting to join the European Union but will increased trade and political benefits outweigh the cost of letting the poor relatives join the club ?
FOR THE POOR nations of Eastern Europe the choice is simple: change outdated restrictive laws from the communist era, open your markets and embrace full democracy and, in return, join the rich man's club with 370 million consumers and billions of Ecus in structural funds ready to change everything for the better. For the richer nations to the West however the calculations are more complex. The first wave of six new members, the more prosperous ones, now due to be admitted some time after 2004, will increase the population of the EU by 28% but their total Gross Domestic Product (GDP) will only add an extra 3%.
|
DEFINITION OF GDP FROM EUROSTAT:
|
According to the European Commission's figures, if the first eleven applicants were admitted and no change was made to the rules of the structural fund for regional assistance, 60% of the enlarged EU population or 300 million people would qualify for special help. The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) too would go bust as the new entrants would require an additional 8 billion pounds annually. Overall the European Union budget would go up from 1.27% of the member countries' GDP to 2.5% which could involve the UK in 5 to 10 billion pounds extra spending per year. The Commission do not intend to ask EU voters for this level of extra cash. They are busy reforming the CAP and the structural funds. The President of the European Parliament, Jose Maria Gil-Robles recently warned the public of Eastern and Central Europe against 'harbouring illusions' and emphasised that enlargement must be conducted 'responsibly and prudently' . In a meeting with the Parliamentary Presidents of the applicant countries he felt that the EU 'would have to redefine its mission and method of functioning in order to face new challenges together'. The Commission now insists that it will keep within the present spending limit of 1.27% of GDP. On the plus side, the eastern economies are growing faster than the western ones and trade between Eastern Europe and the EU has more than tripled in value since 1989. Harmonising laws and economic practice will also make inward investment to the applicant countries safer and conditions more stable.
Lastly the political benefits of tying the eastern nations to the EU after two world conflagrations and the iron curtain of the cold war have already split the continent apart three times this century, can only be guessed .
Member State |
GDP/person |
% EU Average |
Applicant State |
GDP/person |
% EU Average |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Luxembourg |
23,200 |
166 |
Slovenia |
9,600 |
68 |
|
Denmark |
16,100 |
115 |
Czech Republic |
8,800 |
63 |
|
Belgium |
15,800 |
113 |
Hungary |
6,600 |
47 |
|
Austria |
15,700 |
112 |
Slovakia |
6,600 |
47 |
|
Germany |
15,400 |
110 |
Poland |
5,500 |
40 |
|
Netherlands |
14,600 |
105 |
Estonia |
5,200 |
37 |
|
France |
14,600 |
104 |
Romania |
4,300 |
31 |
|
Italy |
14,100 |
101 |
Lithuania |
4,300 |
30 |
|
United Kingdom |
13,900 |
100 |
Latvia |
3,800 |
27 |
|
Finland |
13,800 |
99 |
Bulgaria |
3,200 |
23 |
|
Sweden |
13,800 |
98 |
|
|
|
|
Ireland |
13,400 |
96 |
|
|
|
|
Spain |
10,900 |
78 |
|
|
|
|
Portugal |
9,900 |
71 |
|
|
|
|
Greece |
9,700 |
69 |
|
|
|
|
Back to |
Forward to |
Up to |
