Brexit, the economy and house prices part 5

Rinoa

Ballard wrote: »

Maybe post a link to the agreements on here and we can all have a look and come up with a figure.

The agreements for a divorce bill don't exist. Otherwise the EU would be able to point to them as evidence for their claim.

Ballard

Rinoa wrote: »

The agreements for a divorce bill don't exist. Otherwise the EU would be able to point to them as evidence for their claim.

But the agreements committing us to funding for the next few years do exist.

ukcarper

Ballard wrote: »

But the agreements committing us to funding for the next few years do exist.

Does that amount to 10 years or more net payments.

Ballard

ukcarper wrote: »

Does that amount to 10 years or more net payments.

I don't know because, as I've already stated, I haven't read any of them.

Rinoa

Ballard wrote: »

But the agreements committing us to funding for the next few years do exist.

The 'divorce bill' is far more than that.

The PM has in any case promised no country will lose out due to our leaving before the current funding round is completed.

Rinoa

LONDON (Reuters) - The European Union agreed that Britain would not have to come up with a figure for a financial deal to leave the bloc before moving talks on to discuss a trade deal, Brexit minister David Davis said on Sunday.

Speaking to Sky News, Davis said Britain agreed to the sequencing of talks demanded by the EU but had told the bloc’s negotiators it would not come up with a figure to push them beyond ‘phase one’.
“We said: alright. we’ll do this sequencing, but don’t imagine you will have a number or a formula (for the financial settlement) at the end of it. We’ll get towards that process but you won’t have a number or a formula before we move on to the next stage. They accepted that,” he said.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-davis/eu-agreed-no-sum-needed-to-move-talks-forward-british-brexit-minister-idUKKBN1DC0EG?rpc=401&

Ballard

Rinoa wrote: »

The 'divorce bill' is far more than that.

The PM has in any case promised no country will lose out due to our leaving before the current funding round is completed.

I think that we need to look at all he commitments that we’ve signed up to for starters. Once that’s done we will be in a position to assess whether we are being ripped off. I’m far from a legal expert but hopefully it’ll be reasonably easy to understand the fundamentals.

kabayiri

The problem for the EU is that they do have some projects which they are funding which run over a number of years, and even perhaps cross over budget boundaries.

But...they should always understand they need to always be flexible and replan when required. Nobody can fully predict a global market crash for example. An outbreak of war somewhere could be all that is needed to trigger a need to rethink things.

This is why they have mid-budget reviews.

I do not see why they can not replan when it comes to a new road project or bridge somewhere in the EU. There *are* 28 states in the EU, and that sort of size should provide some kind of buffer against one state leaving.

The reality in the EU is that pretty much a 1/3 of the states shoulder much of the funding burden. How anyone can imagine that is sustainable long term is beyond me. This might be the trigger they need to sort things out.

vivatifosi

In addition to a third of the countries being net contributors, you also have to factor in our size as an economy. We don't contribute 1/28th of EU GDP but approximately 1/6th. That's a lot to lose.

Filo25

kabayiri wrote: »

The problem for the EU is that they do have some projects which they are funding which run over a number of years, and even perhaps cross over budget boundaries.

But...they should always understand they need to always be flexible and replan when required. Nobody can fully predict a global market crash for example. An outbreak of war somewhere could be all that is needed to trigger a need to rethink things.

This is why they have mid-budget reviews.

I do not see why they can not replan when it comes to a new road project or bridge somewhere in the EU. There *are* 28 states in the EU, and that sort of size should provide some kind of buffer against one state leaving.

The reality in the EU is that pretty much a 1/3 of the states shoulder much of the funding burden. How anyone can imagine that is sustainable long term is beyond me. This might be the trigger they need to sort things out.

The idea remains that through fiscal transfers to the poorer nations (and indeed poorer regions in richer nations) will eventually help to raise those markets up to the level where they can contribute more and need less assistance from the wealthier areas.

Not radically different to how any country's finances tend to work, in the UK you could say the same about London and the South East effectively supporting the rest of the country.