EU Referendum: The result and aftermath...

[nidave]

I think the £8-10bn figure would be sticking to our commitments, rather than the extortionate £39bn the EU want for not a lot back in return

Where is your figure coming from - the £39bn was negoitated by both the UK and the EU they both think this is an accurate amount. So lets see some evidence for your claim

 

[Geezertronic]

How did you come to that amount? I can't find a breakdown anywhere of how the final figure has been calculated.

Where is your figure coming from - the £39bn was negoitated by both the UK and the EU they both think this is an accurate amount. So lets see some evidence for your claim

I was quoting the estimated figure mentioned by @furnessvale in post #14937 so you may want to ask the question to a different person

 

[cactustwirly]

We are liable for things we have already agreed. The true figure for these is estimated at £8-10bn, far less than the extortionate £39bn demanded by the EU which is far more than the gross contributions the UK would have paid in the same period, let alone net.

Where are you getting your figures from?

 

[Esker-pades]

I think the £8-10bn figure would be sticking to our commitments, rather than the extortionate £39bn the EU want for not a lot back in return

The United Kingdom and EU both agreed to that figure. Both parties have decided that that is the fair figure.

I was quoting the estimated figure mentioned by @furnessvale in post #14937 so you may want to ask the question to a different person

Thus, how can you decide what is a fair figure or not if you're simply quoting someone else without understanding it?

 

[ainsworth74]

I think the £8-10bn figure would be sticking to our commitments, rather than the extortionate £39bn the EU want for not a lot back in return

Only if we pay it! Some are still suggesting we leave and pay nothing! I have no idea whether £8bn or £39bn is an equitable figure. But we surely must owe something so something should be paid.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Only if we pay it! Some are still suggesting we leave and pay nothing! I have no idea whether £8bn or £39bn is an equitable figure. But we surely must owe something so something should be paid.

TBH if the UK defaults totally (i.e. pays nothing despite something clearly being due) and I was the EU I would seriously consider a trade war and trade sanctions.

Defaulting on agreed debt is totally unacceptable at any level.

Remember, we need the EU far more than they need us.

 

[Geezertronic]

Thus, how can you decide what is a fair figure or not if you're simply quoting someone else without understanding it?

Put quite simply:

The UKs gross contribution to the EU in 2016 was £13bn (not including the rebate which is already deducted), less money received back means the UK's net contribution to the EU in 2016 was estimated at around £9bn so a figure of £8-10bn seems fair based on a year of net contributions after we leave the EU.

Based on that, £39bn is 3 years of contributions with nothing back in return. Walking away without paying a penny would be extreme and not something I would happily sign up for

https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/gove...les/theukcontributiontotheeubudget/2017-10-31

 

[Esker-pades]

Put quite simply:

The UKs gross contribution to the EU in 2016 was £13bn (not including the rebate which is already deducted), less money received back means the UK's net contribution to the EU in 2017 was estimated at around £9bn so a figure of £8-10bn seems fair based on a year of net contributions after we leave the EU.

Based on that, £39bn is 3 years of contributions with nothing back in return. Walking away without paying a penny would be extreme and not something I would happily sign up for

https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/gove...les/theukcontributiontotheeubudget/2017-10-31

https://fullfact.org/europe/eu-divorce-bill/
https://fullfact.org/europe/what-is-divorce-bill-paying-for/

EU Budget contributions are only 1 of 3 parts. The other 2 are Payment of outstanding commitments and Financing liabilities up to the end of 2020.

£20bn of that £39bn is towards additional spending on EU projects that the UK already committed to. The rest is the EU budget, and liabilities (pensions being the biggest part of the additional liabilities).

 

[furnessvale]

TBH if the UK defaults totally (i.e. pays nothing despite something clearly being due) and I was the EU I would seriously consider a trade war and trade sanctions.

Defaulting on agreed debt is totally unacceptable at any level.

Remember, we need the EU far more than they need us.

Fully agree with your first two sentences.

 

[Cowley]

No posts for over four hours!
Has there been an apocalypse? (I know, not until the end of the month)

 

[HH]

One of those Pensions is the "Right Honorable" Nigel Farage, MEP.

 

[Esker-pades]

One of those Pensions is the "Right Honorable" Nigel Farage, MEP.

If he doesn't like the deal, I'm sure we can re-negotiate one where his pension isn't paid .

 

[Groningen]

Visa free travel to 90 days between UK and EU and v.v..

The backstop was an idea by Theresa May and defeated through her own party.

 

[Howardh]

Visa free travel to 90 days between UK and EU and v.v..
The backstop was an idea by Theresa May and defeated through her own party.

With the noted difference that as from 2021 UK citizens may well be required to fill in, online, and pay for an ETIAS entry permit (AKA Visa waiver) where none exits from the Eu to UK.
Also citizens of the EU who travel to Ireland with just their ID card can cross the border into the UK totally unchecked, whereas we, going the other way, may well be subject to added red tape even if it's just to travel.
Only Brexit could make this up.
Clearly "control of our borders" is a misnomer!!

 

[fowler9]

I was quoting the estimated figure mentioned by @furnessvale in post #14937 so you may want to ask the question to a different person

So you base what the UK owes the EU on what some bloke on a rail forum said. Sound economics. I sincerely hope our succession of useless Brexit ministers did better than say "Some bloke on the internet said it" when they agreed, if they did. God knows what they were doing though.

 

[Howardh]

So you base what the UK owes the EU on what some bloke on a rail forum said. Sound economics. I sincerely hope our succession of useless Brexit ministers did better than say "Some bloke on the internet said it" when they agreed, if they did. God knows what they were doing though.

Actually if Raab and Davis had actually popped on a messageboard they might have learned a few things to their advantage!! After all, it was a bloke on the internet that was one of the first to throw "you might have a problem with the UK/Ireland border" to his local MP days before the referendum
Naturally the MP was clueless

 

[Jonny]

I still don't know what grounds the EU has to successfully sue the UK though; remember that pretty much anyone can sue anyone else. Once your contract expires, you wouldn't expect to be charged any more unless it is in exchange for ongoing benefits, why is the EU any different in the event of a no deal?

Also, once you have left you are no longer bound by the rules and that is very much the case with Britain and the EU. In a no deal scenario, obligations effectively become unenforceable. The EU should have planned for the shortfall from day one. Also, the UK as a country is in a much stronger position than an individual to resist enforcement.

 

[VauxhallandI]

I still don't know what grounds the EU has to successfully sue the UK though; remember that pretty much anyone can sue anyone else. Once your contract expires, you wouldn't expect to be charged any more unless it is in exchange for ongoing benefits, why is the EU any different in the event of a no deal?

Also, once you have left you are no longer bound by the rules and that is very much the case with Britain and the EU. In a no deal scenario, obligations effectively become unenforceable. The EU should have planned for the shortfall from day one. Also, the UK as a country is in a much stronger position than an individual to resist enforcement.

Im at a loss as to why you can't understand it.

The contract will not be over, we signed up to the commitments therefore we have a contract to fulfill.

Leaving does not dissolve you of the responsibilities of the contract.

Have you ever read a contract?

 

[EM2]

Once your contract expires, you wouldn't expect to be charged any more unless it is in exchange for ongoing benefits, why is the EU any different in the event of a no deal?

But the 'contract' hasn't expired. The UK committed to make payments for a period up until 2020 and also has some outstanding commitments. The money that was committed has been budgeted for.

 

[EM2]

Sam Coates of The Times has seen a leaked copy of the Government's No Deal planning pack for staff known as Operation Yellowhammer. It's difficult to post as it's all photos of document pages.

Key Yellowhammer slide on no deal consequences - “Operation is potentially enormous” - “Impacts ... could grow exponentially as issues impact upon each other and capabilities of responders at all levels decrease or become overwhelmed”

https://mobile.twitter.com/SamCoatesTimes/status/1091613737923067905

 

[whhistle]

Remember, we need the EU far more than they need us.

Do we?

Last time I looked, al lot of our food (for example) comes from the EU.
The amount of money they'd loose if we told them we were no longer interested in trading is massive... considering Spain is already broke, France is on the fringes of that and Germany isn't doing too well either.
But instead we've just been worrying that the EU will stop trading with us.

If our politicians had been meeting other non-EU countries the past 2 years, we'd probably have a good supply of most of the food items we need. We easily could have been importing more cattle to help ourselves too!

We should pay what we owe, yes, but we've been railroaded into paying more under the threat of this and that. No deal should have always been an option to show that the UK means business. By appearing afraid of a no deal, it's only given the EU more oomph to use as threats against us.

Some of my views come from a family member who has experience of the UK, the Swiss and a good old fashioned EU country. The EU brings rules in, other countries find ways around them. The UK blindly follows the regulations. We are wimps and the EU know this.

 

[nidave]

I was quoting the estimated figure mentioned by @furnessvale in post #14937 so you may want to ask the question to a different person

Sorry may have misquoted you in error

 

[EM2]

No deal should have always been an option to show that the UK means business. By appearing afraid of a no deal, it's only given the EU more oomph to use as threats against us.

No Deal has always been an option. Activate Article 50, wait two years, leave. Done.
We didn't do it because it's a bad idea.

 

[furnessvale]

But the 'contract' hasn't expired. The UK committed to make payments for a period up until 2020 and also has some outstanding commitments. The money that was committed has been budgeted for.

As well as liabilities, presumably the UK has some claim on the assets accumulated by the EU, helped over the years by UK cash, which can be used to offset some of our legitimate liabilities?

 

[VauxhallandI]

You are clutching at straws trying to guess the clauses around assets to suit you.

We don’t have visibility of how assets are treated within the contract.

The UK and the EU agreed on the figure most likely by going through the contract and working it out by the facts. There could have been some trading within that discussion.

Maybe the UK expert lawyers are now idiots too as it doesn’t meet the agenda.

 

[fowler9]

If they EU need us so desperately it would seem rather stupid of them to say they will not renegotiate the deal. Maybe, just maybe the brexiteers are wrong .

 

[Groningen]

In my eyes we need each other, but there are forces every country has to have total independence about everything.

 

[EM2]

As well as liabilities, presumably the UK has some claim on the assets accumulated by the EU, helped over the years by UK cash, which can be used to offset some of our legitimate liabilities?

Assets such as...?

 

[dosxuk]

Do we?

Last time I looked, al lot of our food (for example) comes from the EU.
The amount of money they'd loose if we told them we were no longer interested in trading is massive...

So they'd lose some money and we'd lose our food supply? That sounds like we need them more.

No Deal has always been an option. Activate Article 50, wait two years, leave. Done.
We didn't do it because it's a bad idea.

You don't even need 2 years. We could have handed the notice in, arranged a meeting for that afternoon, said we were leaving with no intention of a future arrangement, signed the forms and been on our way. The 2 year period is a maximum for negotiating the terms of departure and future structure, if you're not interested in any of that, or can agree sooner, you don't have to wait for the clock to tick down.

If no-deal was the plan, we could have left on June 29th 2016, and rejoined (+ € and Schengen, - rebate) by now.

 

[furnessvale]

Assets such as...?

I believe there is a large hot air storage area in Brussels and another one in Strasbourg that we must own 1/28th of. There is also a large underused airport in Spain.