A report in THE TIMES FRIDAY FEBRUARY 18 2005

Propaganda? We're just keeping you all informed, says Brussels
By Anthony Browne
Europe Correspondent

THE European Commission has been accused of spending hundreds of thousands of pounds on a "pro-constitution propaganda" campaign in Britain, despite a pledge by the British Government that "not a single penny" of European public money would be spent in the referendum campaign.

An investigation by The Times has revealed that the European Commission has been funding a series of seminars, leafleting campaigns, theatre activities and "celebration days" about the European constitution across schools, libraries, think-tanks, local government and pro-European pressure groups around Britain.

The Government yesterday told the Commission not to spend any of a dedicated €8 million (£55million) budget for promoting the constitution in Britain. But the Commission has already been spending large sums promoting the constitution, and has insisted that it will still fund general "information" campaigns about the EU in Britain.

EUROPEAN COMMISSION GRANTS TO BRITISH ORGANISATIONS TO PROMOTE EU

Europe Direct Information Network 840,000
Federal Trust 42,005
Europaworld Ltd 18,233
Foreign Policy Centre 38,318
Institute for Citizenship 48,601
Edinburgh City Council 93,734
Chapter Arts Theatre, Cardiff 65~000
Liverpool Hope University College    25,000
University of Hull 10,551
Northamptonshire County Council 32,689
Croydon Council 55,683
Yorkshire Forward   27,291

COMMISSION GRANTS TO PAN-EUROPEAN ORGANISATIONS

International European Movement 450,000
Union of European Federalists 120,000
Friends of Europe 100,000
Young European Federalists 35,000
Festival of Europe (May 9)   155,000
Centre for European Policy Studies 150,000
European Policy Centre    150,000

ALL SUMS QUOTED IN EUROS

[How much money did the International European Movement pass onto their British branch (or what British EM bills did it pay on their behalf) and what EM bills were paid by the other recipients?]

The Commission will also continue spending more than €1 million a year on pan-European federalist campaign groups and think-tanks that have members in Britain or influence debate here.

It gave €10,551 to Hull University to "raise awareness and understanding" of the constitution, and €25,000 to Liverpool Hope University College, to help school pupils and students to find out about the constitution. It gave the Foreign Policy Centre €38,318 for a conference on the constitution last July, and €48,601 to the Institute for Citizenship in London to hold a series of seminars on it.

Grants to public authorities include €27,291 to Yorkshire Forward, the regional development agency, to pay for a conference called Europe Alive with Opportunity. It also paid €18,233 to Europaworld, a non-profit company in Wales, to set up a website to educate people about the constitution and send information to secondary schools.

The Federal Trust, a British think-tank, was paid €42,005 to promote the enlargement of the EU, including the production of 100,000 "information" cards. Its advisory board -includes Andrew Adonis, Tony Blair's policy adviser.

Michael Ancram, Shadow Foreign Secretary, said: "The fact that hundreds of thousands of pounds have already been spent by the European Commission to promote the constitution belies the Government's claim that 'not a single penny will be spent" by them on pro-constitution propaganda. If Labour are sincere about making the referendum debate a fair one, they must get the Commission to pledge that they will spend no more hard-working taxpayers' money on
one-sided publicity for a document most British people oppose."

The Government said that the Commission had not spent new money backing the constitution since Britain had called a referendum. "As soon as the Government decided to call the referendum, we have made dear that we don't want any European public money spent in the UK that can be seen as campaigning for the constitution. It is counterproductive," a government spokesman said.

Neil O'Brien, campaign director of Vote No, said: "The reality is the Commission is already spending a lot of money promoting the constitution. Will those organisations who received money "have to pay it back?"

The European Commission promised not to spend money promoting the constitution, but insisted that it would still spend money providing "information" about the EU. A spokesman said: "We have every right and obligation to promote
information about our activities, and we will continue doing that We are not going to shy away from our duty."

The Commission will continue to fund the Europe Direct Information Network in Britain, which costs €840,000 a year, to "raise local and regional awareness of the Union's policies and programmes". And it will continue the "Spring
Day for Europe" to celebrate the constitution in British schools.

It will also continue spending more than €1 million a year on a network of think-tanks and pressure groups that promote
further European integration, including the International European Movement, the Union of European Federalists, Friends of Europe, Young European Federalists, the Centre for European Policy Studies and the European Policy Centre. They are all based in mainland Europe, but most have member organisations in Britain.

EU truth, page 34

Does anyone know whether the EM have to publish their accounts?

Stuart Coster of DM has answered me with:

As a registered company, limited by guarantee (a non-profit status), the 'European Movement of the United Kingdom Ltd' must publish accounts according to company law and, as with all companies, they are available for a small fee
from Companies House. This is what I have and was referring to in my recent emails on this subject. Their next set covering the financial year 04/05 must be submitted by the end of this month.

However, while such accounts meet legal requirements, they are not very revealing as to where the declared money has come from and what it was spent on. Nothing compels them to publish that detail, but perhaps they reveal that to
their members in an internal annual report or something. I would be surprised if they refused it to a member on request.