Will May Pay or Hope it Fades Away? £55b exit bill...
Discussion
Roofless Toothless said:
Why does this financial settlement seem so unidirectional?
We only get to hear about the ongoing expenses we are committed to. Wouldn't there also be lots of stuff we have invested in over the years that we would be receiving benefit from were it not that we are leaving?
Has this been estimated and offset against the 'leaving fee'?
This will be a take it or leave it bill no matter what else comes afterwards. Its just the way its going to be. I suspect logic wont actually come into it much at all its just something that will be done to allow anything else to progress.We only get to hear about the ongoing expenses we are committed to. Wouldn't there also be lots of stuff we have invested in over the years that we would be receiving benefit from were it not that we are leaving?
Has this been estimated and offset against the 'leaving fee'?
Call this way of looking at it simple minded if you like, but if you got a bill from your builder after a couple of week's work, and you though, Oooh, that's a bit hot, the first thing you would do would be ask for it to be broken down.
Why is this just a one off bill, not to be questioned? That sounds more like a fine than a settlement. There must be debts and benefits running both ways, and for the guardians of our public purse not to ask for an itemisation is a deriliction of their duty. I wouldn't pay them a single penny if it could not be broken down and analysed.
Or, like I said, is that simple minded?
Why is this just a one off bill, not to be questioned? That sounds more like a fine than a settlement. There must be debts and benefits running both ways, and for the guardians of our public purse not to ask for an itemisation is a deriliction of their duty. I wouldn't pay them a single penny if it could not be broken down and analysed.
Or, like I said, is that simple minded?
Roofless Toothless said:
Call this way of looking at it simple minded if you like, but if you got a bill from your builder after a couple of week's work, and you though, Oooh, that's a bit hot, the first thing you would do would be ask for it to be broken down.
Why is this just a one off bill, not to be questioned? That sounds more like a fine than a settlement. There must be debts and benefits running both ways, and for the guardians of our public purse not to ask for an itemisation is a deriliction of their duty. I wouldn't pay them a single penny if it could not be broken down and analysed.
Or, like I said, is that simple minded?
Has the EU actually submitted a bill?Why is this just a one off bill, not to be questioned? That sounds more like a fine than a settlement. There must be debts and benefits running both ways, and for the guardians of our public purse not to ask for an itemisation is a deriliction of their duty. I wouldn't pay them a single penny if it could not be broken down and analysed.
Or, like I said, is that simple minded?
Roofless Toothless said:
Why does this financial settlement seem so unidirectional?
We only get to hear about the ongoing expenses we are committed to. Wouldn't there also be lots of stuff we have invested in over the years that we would be receiving benefit from were it not that we are leaving?
Has this been estimated and offset against the 'leaving fee'?
£58bn according to this:We only get to hear about the ongoing expenses we are committed to. Wouldn't there also be lots of stuff we have invested in over the years that we would be receiving benefit from were it not that we are leaving?
Has this been estimated and offset against the 'leaving fee'?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4471334/LE...
Does seem odd that figures are just plucked from thin air, although I havent been following it too much
Roofless Toothless said:
Why does this financial settlement seem so unidirectional?
We only get to hear about the ongoing expenses we are committed to. Wouldn't there also be lots of stuff we have invested in over the years that we would be receiving benefit from were it not that we are leaving?
Because, as it turns out, the "they need us more than we need them" line may have been a little fib.We only get to hear about the ongoing expenses we are committed to. Wouldn't there also be lots of stuff we have invested in over the years that we would be receiving benefit from were it not that we are leaving?
paulrockliffe said:
No, but they're incredulous that we haven't paid it.
Why is this so difficult for Leavers to get their heads around? 
The reason why the EU has not presented a final exit Bill with a comprehensive breakdown is quite simply because first the methodology of the financial settlement has to be agreed between the UK and EU and then every item of what the UK owes and what the UK can offset needs to be negotiated. The EU made proposals to get this process underway.
Until both Parties actually agree how to work out the Exit Bill and progress from there, no final amount can be specified by anyone and only guessed at. Ball-park figures have been suggested by both sides but only through intense negotiation will a final figure be agreed upon at the end of a process that involves agreement of each and every item that makes up the Bill.
At the moment, it appears we have the EU on the one hand, trying to get the UK to agree how to work out the sums in a way that they find mutually agreeable and then negotiate each and every aspect of what constitutes the Exit Bill and the UK, on the other hand, seemingly unwilling to agree to what it should pay for, if anything.
As such, the EU is saying that the UK is holding up the Exit Bill process and therefore they are unwilling to begin Trade talks until sufficient progress has been made.
The UK is in a tough spot because the hard-line Brexiters want to pay little or as close to zero as possible. This makes it difficult for the UK negotiating Team to even get close to what the EU expect. As such, time is running down and a hard Brexit gets closer each day. Some in the UK are perfectly fine with this scenario and are, indeed, the reason the UK hasn't been able to get very far as yet with the Exit Bill.
I live outside of the UK now and I have been met with a universal attitude from people in the countries where I spend my time that they do not want the EU Negotiators to back down. They are happy for the UK to go it alone if that is what it wants to do, but no special deals must be conceded. They all want the UK to remain, but do not believe the EU is in any way dependant upon the UK doing so.
kowalski655 said:
Roofless Toothless said:
Why does this financial settlement seem so unidirectional?
We only get to hear about the ongoing expenses we are committed to. Wouldn't there also be lots of stuff we have invested in over the years that we would be receiving benefit from were it not that we are leaving?
Has this been estimated and offset against the 'leaving fee'?
£58bn according to this:We only get to hear about the ongoing expenses we are committed to. Wouldn't there also be lots of stuff we have invested in over the years that we would be receiving benefit from were it not that we are leaving?
Has this been estimated and offset against the 'leaving fee'?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4471334/LE...
Does seem odd that figures are just plucked from thin air, although I havent been following it too much
i can't understand why our own government is not being more vocal about this. Could it be that there is nothing so easy to spend as other people's money?
Coolbanana said:
I live outside of the UK now and I have been met with a universal attitude from people in the countries where I spend my time that they do not want the EU Negotiators to back down. They are happy for the UK to go it alone if that is what it wants to do, but no special deals must be conceded. They all want the UK to remain, but do not believe the EU is in any way dependant upon the UK doing so.
This attitude of the EU only demanding what is "rightfully theirs" is rather undermined however by the fact that £10bn or so of what they are demanding up front relates to contingent liabilities that are unlikely to ever become due (will only do so from loan defaults). Also the fact that they are demanding sums to the end of the budget period without recognition that if we are paying in until that point we are also entitled to the benefit of membership up until that point.The UK's government position is as far as I understand it is only a commitment to pay what is legally due. With anything over and above that dependent on the deals obtained, whether that be a transition deal or the eventual free trade agreement.
Coolbanana said:
paulrockliffe said:
No, but they're incredulous that we haven't paid it.
Why is this so difficult for Leavers to get their heads around? The reason why the EU has not presented a final exit Bill with a comprehensive breakdown is quite simply because first the methodology of the financial settlement has to be agreed between the UK and EU and then every item of what the UK owes and what the UK can offset needs to be negotiated. The EU made proposals to get this process underway.
Until both Parties actually agree how to work out the Exit Bill and progress from there, no final amount can be specified by anyone and only guessed at. Ball-park figures have been suggested by both sides but only through intense negotiation will a final figure be agreed upon at the end of a process that involves agreement of each and every item that makes up the Bill.
At the moment, it appears we have the EU on the one hand, trying to get the UK to agree how to work out the sums in a way that they find mutually agreeable and then negotiate each and every aspect of what constitutes the Exit Bill and the UK, on the other hand, seemingly unwilling to agree to what it should pay for, if anything.
As such, the EU is saying that the UK is holding up the Exit Bill process and therefore they are unwilling to begin Trade talks until sufficient progress has been made.
The UK is in a tough spot because the hard-line Brexiters want to pay little or as close to zero as possible. This makes it difficult for the UK negotiating Team to even get close to what the EU expect. As such, time is running down and a hard Brexit gets closer each day. Some in the UK are perfectly fine with this scenario and are, indeed, the reason the UK hasn't been able to get very far as yet with the Exit Bill.
I live outside of the UK now and I have been met with a universal attitude from people in the countries where I spend my time that they do not want the EU Negotiators to back down. They are happy for the UK to go it alone if that is what it wants to do, but no special deals must be conceded. They all want the UK to remain, but do not believe the EU is in any way dependant upon the UK doing so.
The other side of this coin is that the EU came up with a monster number and then said, "agree this number first and then we will let the rest of the deal on trade etc be discussed".
The UK, from early in the process, made it clear that it would pay for its commitments. It was not hardball to point out that an element of the payment would always be based on goodwill, since the ACTUAL legal position is that we're not really obligated for anything once we leave.
The EU seems surprised that the UK is resisting writing an open cheque and is stressing that "nothing is agreed until it is all agreed".
It was the EU that set the ridiculous terms of the negotiating timetable. Quite why you are insinuating that somehow the UK is the one at fault here and holding things up is beyond me ...... or, actually perhaps its not beyond me because the most likely reason is that you just want to paint the UK as crapply as possible. No doubt you fully agree with Mr Junckers insulting description of the UK as being the drinker at the bar who tries to leave without paying his tab?
Anyway, it's rumoured that what will be offered to the UK in terms of trade is a Canadian style agreement...... for which Canada does not have to accept FOM, nor does it have to pay a penny. Remind me again why we have to pay more than we are legally or morally obliged to?
johnxjsc1985 said:
I know its been mentioned before and Farage has brought this up but if we are having a divorce don't we get to tot up all the assets we have contributed to as part of any calculation.
It all goes back to a bill of punishment for leaving.
That is precisely what we are doing.It all goes back to a bill of punishment for leaving.
johnxjsc1985 said:
I know its been mentioned before and Farage has brought this up but if we are having a divorce don't we get to tot up all the assets we have contributed to as part of any calculation.
An inconvenient truth for the EUjohnxjsc1985 said:
It all goes back to a bill of punishment for leaving.
Which some on the Remain side feel is justified.... Zod said:
That is precisely what we are doing.
It's not what the EU is doing though. Their position is that EU assets do not belong to the members that paid for them. With the exception of the UK holding in the EIB, (which we have to wait up to 20 years for apparently) the other assets are not divisible, and cannot be considered in the settlement.
Only the "obligations for the UK to pay" are to be negotiated.
Let's hope that the EU sees some sense.
Coolbanana said:
Why is this so difficult for Leavers to get their heads around?
The reason why the EU has not presented a final exit Bill with a comprehensive breakdown is quite simply because first the methodology of the financial settlement has to be agreed between the UK and EU and then every item of what the UK owes and what the UK can offset needs to be negotiated. The EU made proposals to get this process underway.
Until both Parties actually agree how to work out the Exit Bill and progress from there, no final amount can be specified by anyone and only guessed at. Ball-park figures have been suggested by both sides but only through intense negotiation will a final figure be agreed upon at the end of a process that involves agreement of each and every item that makes up the Bill.
At the moment, it appears we have the EU on the one hand, trying to get the UK to agree how to work out the sums in a way that they find mutually agreeable and then negotiate each and every aspect of what constitutes the Exit Bill and the UK, on the other hand, seemingly unwilling to agree to what it should pay for, if anything.
As such, the EU is saying that the UK is holding up the Exit Bill process and therefore they are unwilling to begin Trade talks until sufficient progress has been made.
The UK is in a tough spot because the hard-line Brexiters want to pay little or as close to zero as possible. This makes it difficult for the UK negotiating Team to even get close to what the EU expect. As such, time is running down and a hard Brexit gets closer each day. Some in the UK are perfectly fine with this scenario and are, indeed, the reason the UK hasn't been able to get very far as yet with the Exit Bill.
I live outside of the UK now and I have been met with a universal attitude from people in the countries where I spend my time that they do not want the EU Negotiators to back down. They are happy for the UK to go it alone if that is what it wants to do, but no special deals must be conceded. They all want the UK to remain, but do not believe the EU is in any way dependant upon the UK doing so.
Sorry chum, but that looks and sounds like an EU edict conscious only of its own absurdity. Leave or Remain, there can be no misunderstanding about EU motives. To the best of available knowledge there has been no attempt to calculate any 'sums due' nor any attempt to arrive at a formula.The reason why the EU has not presented a final exit Bill with a comprehensive breakdown is quite simply because first the methodology of the financial settlement has to be agreed between the UK and EU and then every item of what the UK owes and what the UK can offset needs to be negotiated. The EU made proposals to get this process underway.
Until both Parties actually agree how to work out the Exit Bill and progress from there, no final amount can be specified by anyone and only guessed at. Ball-park figures have been suggested by both sides but only through intense negotiation will a final figure be agreed upon at the end of a process that involves agreement of each and every item that makes up the Bill.
At the moment, it appears we have the EU on the one hand, trying to get the UK to agree how to work out the sums in a way that they find mutually agreeable and then negotiate each and every aspect of what constitutes the Exit Bill and the UK, on the other hand, seemingly unwilling to agree to what it should pay for, if anything.
As such, the EU is saying that the UK is holding up the Exit Bill process and therefore they are unwilling to begin Trade talks until sufficient progress has been made.
The UK is in a tough spot because the hard-line Brexiters want to pay little or as close to zero as possible. This makes it difficult for the UK negotiating Team to even get close to what the EU expect. As such, time is running down and a hard Brexit gets closer each day. Some in the UK are perfectly fine with this scenario and are, indeed, the reason the UK hasn't been able to get very far as yet with the Exit Bill.
I live outside of the UK now and I have been met with a universal attitude from people in the countries where I spend my time that they do not want the EU Negotiators to back down. They are happy for the UK to go it alone if that is what it wants to do, but no special deals must be conceded. They all want the UK to remain, but do not believe the EU is in any way dependant upon the UK doing so.
The EU so far as anyone can work out has produced exactly zero details of a legitimate accounting for a final separation settlement but have awaited UK to offer what looks to them like a reasonable amount. They have consistently avoided giving any indication of a sum and have repeatedly refused to talk about future trade without it.
So, UK should say: 'If you refuse to talk about Trade and decline to talk about how you calculate a separation settlement we rescind our earlier offer of £20B and withdraw from further negotiation. We remind you that you have our Article 50. We will of course reconvene when your demands become acceptable'.
Edited by Thorodin on Wednesday 22 November 11:55
Thorodin said:
So, UK should say: 'If you refuse to talk about Trade and decline to talk about how you calculate a separation settlement we rescind our earlier offer of £20B and withdraw from further negotiation. We remind you that you have our Article 50. We will of course reconvene when your demands become acceptable'.
At which point the Eu say okey dokey & we all get to enjoy 40 miles of lorry spotting every day as we munch on Hyde park grown turnips. Utter fantasy.Thorodin said:
Sorry chum, but that looks and sounds like an EU edict conscious only of its own absurdity. Leave or Remain, there can be no misunderstanding about EU motives. To the best of available knowledge there has been no attempt to calculate any 'sums due' nor any attempt to arrive at a formula.#
The EU so far as anyone can work out has produced exactly zero details of a legitimate accounting for a final separation settlement but have awaited UK to offer what looks to them like a reasonable amount. They have consistently avoided giving any indication of a sum and have repeatedly refused to talk about future trade without it.
So, UK should say: 'If you refuse to talk about Trade and decline to talk about how you calculate a separation settlement we rescind our earlier offer of £20B and withdraw from further negotiation. We remind you that you have our Article 50. We will of course reconvene when your demands become acceptable'.
Sounds fair enough to me.The EU so far as anyone can work out has produced exactly zero details of a legitimate accounting for a final separation settlement but have awaited UK to offer what looks to them like a reasonable amount. They have consistently avoided giving any indication of a sum and have repeatedly refused to talk about future trade without it.
So, UK should say: 'If you refuse to talk about Trade and decline to talk about how you calculate a separation settlement we rescind our earlier offer of £20B and withdraw from further negotiation. We remind you that you have our Article 50. We will of course reconvene when your demands become acceptable'.
Itemised bill or get nothing.
Funkycoldribena said:
Thorodin said:
Sorry chum, but that looks and sounds like an EU edict conscious only of its own absurdity. Leave or Remain, there can be no misunderstanding about EU motives. To the best of available knowledge there has been no attempt to calculate any 'sums due' nor any attempt to arrive at a formula.#
The EU so far as anyone can work out has produced exactly zero details of a legitimate accounting for a final separation settlement but have awaited UK to offer what looks to them like a reasonable amount. They have consistently avoided giving any indication of a sum and have repeatedly refused to talk about future trade without it.
So, UK should say: 'If you refuse to talk about Trade and decline to talk about how you calculate a separation settlement we rescind our earlier offer of £20B and withdraw from further negotiation. We remind you that you have our Article 50. We will of course reconvene when your demands become acceptable'.
Sounds fair enough to me.The EU so far as anyone can work out has produced exactly zero details of a legitimate accounting for a final separation settlement but have awaited UK to offer what looks to them like a reasonable amount. They have consistently avoided giving any indication of a sum and have repeatedly refused to talk about future trade without it.
So, UK should say: 'If you refuse to talk about Trade and decline to talk about how you calculate a separation settlement we rescind our earlier offer of £20B and withdraw from further negotiation. We remind you that you have our Article 50. We will of course reconvene when your demands become acceptable'.
Itemised bill or get nothing.
What a weird country Britain is.
Canada got a good EU trade deal and did not pay a penny for it.
The UK has a huge £60,000,000,000 trade deficit every year with the EU, equating to almost 1 trillion Euros in the next decade. The UK buys far more from the EU, than the EU buys from the UK.
The EU is in a permanent state of crisis and chaos. From bailing out bankrupt nations to countries quitting or splitting to winding up the Russians in Ukraine to German politicians who cannot form a government, the EU is in permanent fire-fighting mode.
And, still, the British people want to talk up the EU and talk down their own UK country.
Still, the Bremainers want to give the EU tens of billions of free cash from UK taxpayers.
The British desire for self-flagellation is most bizarre. Very few, if any, other countries in the world have such a weird culture.
Canada got a good EU trade deal and did not pay a penny for it.
The UK has a huge £60,000,000,000 trade deficit every year with the EU, equating to almost 1 trillion Euros in the next decade. The UK buys far more from the EU, than the EU buys from the UK.
The EU is in a permanent state of crisis and chaos. From bailing out bankrupt nations to countries quitting or splitting to winding up the Russians in Ukraine to German politicians who cannot form a government, the EU is in permanent fire-fighting mode.
And, still, the British people want to talk up the EU and talk down their own UK country.
Still, the Bremainers want to give the EU tens of billions of free cash from UK taxpayers.
The British desire for self-flagellation is most bizarre. Very few, if any, other countries in the world have such a weird culture.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff