Will May Pay or Hope it Fades Away? £55b exit bill...

[Mario149]

superlightr said:

Mario149 said:

A whole 12%, how will they ever survive?! In actual money terms we cut, as one country, way more per year for austerity last time I checked and we're basically still here and functioning. While the loss of £8.5Bn or so will be annoying to the EU, I'm sure they'll find some way to split it or cut back spending a little between the twenty seven of them

but they cant - the EU wont and cant cut the spending and its not all 27 contributing is about 6 that are net contributors of which the UK is the 2nd largest.

Of course they can, it's just a matter of will to do it - they're not going to blindly blunder on crying into their cornflakes. Exactly the same thing was said about austerity by Labour if memory serves. Our leaving contribution will cover a few years of our payments we would have made, plenty of time to get things sorted. And it doesn't have to be all cuts or all additional contribs. Cut half, contribute half. Honestly, the notion that we as one country can cut something like 14Bn per year and essentially carry on, but 27 countries can't manage to save 2/3s of that between them is pretty much as daft as it sounds.

[Mario149]

Murph7355 said:

Mario149 said:

A whole 12%, how will they ever survive?! In actual money terms we cut, as one country, way more per year for austerity last time I checked and we're basically still here and functioning. While the loss of £8.5Bn or so will be annoying to the EU, I'm sure they'll find some way to split it or cut back spending a little between the twenty seven of them

Out of interest why do they the insist on a quite large payment for leaving?

Because they can.

[mx5nut]

Mario149 said:

Murph7355 said:

Mario149 said:

A whole 12%, how will they ever survive?! In actual money terms we cut, as one country, way more per year for austerity last time I checked and we're basically still here and functioning. While the loss of £8.5Bn or so will be annoying to the EU, I'm sure they'll find some way to split it or cut back spending a little between the twenty seven of them

Out of interest why do they the insist on a quite large payment for leaving?

Because they can.

We want something from them, so we have to dance to their tune to get it.

If only somebody had warned us before we voted!

[Jockman]

mx5nut said:

We want something from them, so we have to dance to their tune to get it.

If only somebody had warned us before we voted!

Doesn't make sense. They also want something from us.

[Eddie Strohacker]

Jockman said:

mx5nut said:

We want something from them, so we have to dance to their tune to get it.

If only somebody had warned us before we voted!

Doesn't make sense. They also want something from us.

I live in hope that leave will realise the game is rigged. Yes they want something from us but what we need from them is far greater. They know this & are acting accordingly. That the UK gov are not walking away from divorce talks apparently mired in arguments over the bill are evidence enough of that.

[Eric Mc]

Jockman said:

Doesn't make sense. They also want something from us.

And that's the nub. Who is the most dependent and who will lose out the most when the UK finally leaves?

[Jockman]

Eddie Strohacker said:

Jockman said:

mx5nut said:

We want something from them, so we have to dance to their tune to get it.

If only somebody had warned us before we voted!

Doesn't make sense. They also want something from us.

I live in hope that leave will realise the game is rigged. Yes they want something from us but what we need from them is far greater. They know this & are acting accordingly. That the UK gov are not walking away from divorce talks apparently mired in arguments over the bill are evidence enough of that.

Eduardo, we're trying to find the sweet spot that will precipitate the next stage of discussions. The Govt has a duty of care to UK tax payers.

The answer was never £20bn, nor was it £60bn.

[Jockman]

Eric Mc said:

Jockman said:

Doesn't make sense. They also want something from us.

And that's the nub. Who is the most dependent and who will lose out the most when the UK finally leaves?

Good point Eric. That's what the entire process is about. The UK is not the only concerned Govt in the EU.

[Eddie Strohacker]

Jockman said:

Eduardo, we're trying to find the sweet spot that will precipitate the next stage of discussions. The Govt has a duty of care to UK tax payers.

The answer was never £20bn, nor was it £60bn.

Point taken. However, the EU has the same duty & we have considerably more to lose. The game really IS rigged. My prediction is we will pay through the nose.

[mx5nut]

Eddie Strohacker said:

Jockman said:

Eduardo, we're trying to find the sweet spot that will precipitate the next stage of discussions. The Govt has a duty of care to UK tax payers.

The answer was never £20bn, nor was it £60bn.

Point taken. However, the EU has the same duty & we have considerably more to lose. The game really IS rigged. My prediction is we will pay through the nose.

And despite what some here think, Remainers are not celebrating this - they'd just rather you lot accepted that you won and got on with it as this wishy washy stalling from our government is helping nobody.

[Jockman]

Eddie Strohacker said:

Jockman said:

Eduardo, we're trying to find the sweet spot that will precipitate the next stage of discussions. The Govt has a duty of care to UK tax payers.

The answer was never £20bn, nor was it £60bn.

Point taken. However, the EU has the same duty & we have considerably more to lose. The game really IS rigged. My prediction is we will pay through the nose.

And you may well be right.

And you may well be wrong.

I'm in the process of buying 4 Companies. To use the above analogy, 1 has bitten at £20bn. One will not budge on £60bn. One is not speaking to me at the moment (long story). One is negotiating hard and tbh I will probably concede to them.

[JagLover]

Eddie Strohacker said:

Point taken. However, the EU has the same duty & we have considerably more to lose. The game really IS rigged. My prediction is we will pay through the nose.

I think some are getting so focused on the Brexit bill that they are ignoring the fact that in of itself the UK government would be ill advised to sign a Canada style deal as it does not safeguard many of our essential trade interests. The whole point of a FTA is that both sides negotiate supplemental points to WTO rules to promote essential interests on both sides.

To then propose we spend £60bn to then sign such a deal is rather ludicrous.

[pss1]

Eric Mc said:

And that's the nub. Who is the most dependent and who will lose out the most when the UK finally leaves?

Whilst there’s been a great deal of teeth gnashing about what might happen on this side of the channel in the event of no deal, what I’d like to know is what would happen to the EU as an institution if there were no deal?

So, fast forward, it’s March 2019, it’s all gone belly up, the FTSE 100’s gone bananas, Sterling has reached parity with the Zimbabwean Dollar, the truck queue stretches from Dover to Carlisle, shops are running low on Toffifee and Werther’s Originals, people are burning Ikea furniture in the streets etc.

But what’s going on in Brussels at that point? Do they have huge financial reserves to tap into to plug the gap? Would there be frantic summit meetings to get the remaining net contributors to cough up? Would anyone want to cough up more? A genuine question, I just want to see what folk think.

[Eddie Strohacker]

JagLover said:

I think some are getting so focused on the Brexit bill that they are ignoring the fact that in of itself the UK government would be ill advised to sign a Canada style deal as it does not safeguard many of our essential trade interests. The whole point of a FTA is that both sides negotiate supplemental points to WTO rules to promote essential interests on both sides.

To then propose we spend £60bn to then sign such a deal is rather ludicrous.

With respect, this is the thread about the bill. Focusing on it is what happens here.

[PurpleMoonlight]

JagLover said:

I think some are getting so focused on the Brexit bill that they are ignoring the fact that in of itself the UK government would be ill advised to sign a Canada style deal as it does not safeguard many of our essential trade interests. The whole point of a FTA is that both sides negotiate supplemental points to WTO rules to promote essential interests on both sides.

To then propose we spend £60bn to then sign such a deal is rather ludicrous.

We aren't being asked to buy a trade deal. That is precisely why the EU are separating the negotiation on the divorce bill and trade.

[Randy Winkman]

Jockman said:

Eddie Strohacker said:

Jockman said:

Eduardo, we're trying to find the sweet spot that will precipitate the next stage of discussions. The Govt has a duty of care to UK tax payers.

The answer was never £20bn, nor was it £60bn.

Point taken. However, the EU has the same duty & we have considerably more to lose. The game really IS rigged. My prediction is we will pay through the nose.

And you may well be right.

And you may well be wrong.

I'm in the process of buying 4 Companies. To use the above analogy, 1 has bitten at £20bn. One will not budge on £60bn. One is not speaking to me at the moment (long story). One is negotiating hard and tbh I will probably concede to them.

That's nothing. It's Black Friday and I might go to Argos and buy a Zinc Smart X hoverboard for £50 or go to Pets At Home for a Grand Climber Cat Activity Centre for £63. What do you reckon?

[Jockman]

PurpleMoonlight said:

We aren't being asked to buy a trade deal. That is precisely why the EU are separating the negotiation on the divorce bill and trade.

By insisting on progress on the first stage before activating the second stage, is the EU not (inadvertently) linking the 2 stages?

[PurpleMoonlight]

Jockman said:

By insisting on progress on the first stage before activating the second stage, is the EU not (inadvertently) linking the 2 stages?

It's separating them.

[Jockman]

Randy Winkman said:

That's nothing. It's Black Friday and I might go to Argos and buy a Zinc Smart X hoverboard for £50 or go to Pets At Home for a Grand Climber Cat Activity Centre for £63. What do you reckon?

Go for it

[Jockman]

PurpleMoonlight said:

Jockman said:

By insisting on progress on the first stage before activating the second stage, is the EU not (inadvertently) linking the 2 stages?

It's separating them.

If they are separate stages then why can't negotiations run separately, coterminous?

The EU has linked them by making one a precondition of the other.