In a symbolic gesture against the EU's inability to properly balance its books, the UK Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne, has refused to sign off its accounts.
The EU has now been unable to balance its books for the last 16 years, even to the satisfaction of its own auditors. Although the situation is gradually improving, EU MPs would rather vote for an increase of 2.9% in the money the taxpayers provide rather than looking at where the money is going.
The routine vote, which normally just gets nodded through, was in regards of the 2009 accounts and The UK abstained from voting as did the Nertherlands and Sweden. All three countries have issued a statement calling on the EU Commission to give out full details on how the Union deals with subsidies and highlight the amount of fraud and waste that exists.
But this is not the only area where the UK Government is taking a sides-wipe at the EU.
Earlier in the week The Prime Minister, David Cameron, expressed his displeasure in the House at the prospect of being forced into giving all prisoners the vote by EU led human rights legislation. He said that the government would do the minimum to comply
Then just yesterday the Home Secretary, Theresa May joined in. During a commons statement she said that that she was 'appalled' at a recent Supreme Court decision that sex offenders should have the right to seek to remove their names from the register. She said the government would do the minimum to comply. The Supreme Court decision was based it seems on EU led human rights legislation with permanent registration being viewed as 'disproportionate'.
The government may be publicly unhappy, but is this really all just grandstanding for the benefit of the domestic voters in the knowledge that they have no real say on these matters? Or are they setting out boundaries for future legislation and testing the political waters?