Postage and pasties: some more fine messes that Brussels has got us into The system whereby VAT must be levied on goods and services derives, of course, from the EU, and its basic ground-rules are laid down in what is known as the Sixth VAT directive (most recently updated as 2006/112/EC). One of these rules is that certain goods, such as food, may be "zero-rated," meaning that no tax need be paid. But back in 1984 our Tory government decided that, by making an exception (which is unique among EU countries) for fish and chips and other "hot takeaway food," it could, over the years, raise billions of pounds in VAT. This controversially brought takeway shops into line with restaurants which, under EU law, already had to charge VAT for providing a "service." In 1994, however, Herr Manfred Bog, the German owner of three snack vans, embarked on a long legal battle after his local tax authorities ruled that, because his vans had an awning, beneath which his customers could shelter while eating their wurst, he was providing not "goods" but a "service." For this he must therefore pay full VAT. Last year, as my colleague Richard North explains in detail on his EU Referendum blog, this and other cases were finally decided by the European Court of Justice, which ruled that Herr Bog's takeway snacks were indeed "food" and not a "service." He and other takeaway sellers could therefore, as the Sixth VAT directive allowed, be taxed at a lower rate of VAT. As Postcomm, our postal regulator, explained at that time, the most damaging of these three was the one that transformed Royal Mail's operating profit into a whacking loss by allowing private firms to cream off its most lucrative line of business, bulk mail. While firms such as the German-owned DHL were able to rack up large profits by collecting the mail, Royal Mail still had to deliver it for just 14p an item, thus incurring a huge loss. Royal Mail was forced into drastic cost-cutting, for example by abandoning collections on Sunday and sharply reducing others. Its way of complying with another directive was to introduce that ludicrous system whereby items are now charged by "size and weight," making post office queues even longer. As predicted, the consequent price rises for the rest of us have continued Royal Mail's downward spiral as, along with the advent of emails, the number of letters sent continues to decline. Last year alone the number carried fell by a further 30 per cent. As with those "hot pies," and the angels-on-a-pin speculation as to how long a newly baked loaf should be allowed to cool before it no longer attracts 20 per cent VAT, the real cause of all this chaos - that mysterious system of government based in Brussels - is allowed to remain skulking in the shadows. But, as I have often asked before, if our politicians are so keen for us to remain under EU rule, why are they so reluctant to explain its workings to the rest of us? The sad truth is, I suspect, that they don't want to admit they don't understand it either. Climate officials officially unhappy I was naturally intrigued to see the Sunday Telegraph quoted online as reporting that the Department for Energy and Climate Change is showering money on consultants to come up with ways of raising the morale of its staff, because they are "too ashamed to admit where they work." Although they are "responsible for some of the government's most important policies," their ministry is held in such low esteem by the public that this has left them feeling "miserable and disengaged." Why had I not read this remarkable story before? Then I noticed that the Sunday Telegraph in question was the one published in Australia. It was reporting on collapsing morale not in our own climate change department but its equivalent in a country where the Labour government's obsession with solar panels, wind turbines and other green policies has recently led, in Queensland, to the greatest electoral rout in Australian history. This is viewed as a portent for the defeat at federal level of the government of Julia Gillard, whose swingeing "carbon tax" - the one she promised she would not introduce - has been a major factor in its declining fortunes. Australia is thus the first country in the world where unpopular environmental policies have become a political game-changer, an opportunity we here in Britain have so far been denied by the greenie unanimity of all our major parties. As for our own Department for Energy and Climate Change, I enjoyed the story of the passer-by who recently saw two of its staff smoking outside in the street. "I thought that contributed to global warming," he observed to them. "Oh, you don't have to believe all that tosh to work here," they replied.