Brexit - divorce bill

50Twuncle

In light of Europe not wanting UK to leave without paying vast sums of leaving money (divorce bill)

Why don't we stay but give notice for 3 years time to ensure that we still benefit from the rebates etc ??

I mean - surely, they can't expect us to continue to pay the same for another 3 years without continuing to receive ALL the same benefits as a full member state ?
Also - until May 29th 2019 - we are still FULL members - so surely are entitled to sit in on ALL debates held ?

Malthusian

I think the divorce bill should be simply paid for by a tax on people who voted Remain.

Let's face it, it's not like they can be any more peed off by Brexit than they already are.

This is an entirely unselfish suggestion as I would be liable for half rate tax as an abstainer.

50Twuncle

Malthusian wrote: »

I think the divorce bill should be simply paid for by a tax on people who voted Remain.

Let's face it, it's not like they can be any more peed off by Brexit than they already are.

This is an entirely unselfish suggestion as I would be liable for half rate tax as an abstainer.

Don't you mean by the "Leavers" ?
The whole issue has been caused by these people...
Or perhaps Farage should be personally billed ?

Thrugelmir

The divorce bill relates to longer term liabilities such as pensions, projects etc. Issue is the UK receives no benefit for it's net contribution to the European road network for example.

LHW99

A Danish minister on Today this morning indicated that the amount the EU wanted was equivalent to the UK paying 5 years contributions, which was beyond the end of the current EU budget. He felt the EU should decide to reduce its requirements / adjust contribution levies on the other members, for the next budget, and it was not fair for the UK to pay the proposed amount.
IMO he is right

Filo25

LHW99 wrote: »

A Danish minister on Today this morning indicated that the amount the EU wanted was equivalent to the UK paying 5 years contributions, which was beyond the end of the current EU budget. He felt the EU should decide to reduce its requirements / adjust contribution levies on the other members, for the next budget, and it was not fair for the UK to pay the proposed amount.
IMO he is right

That Danish minister seems to have been the only prominent politician really saying anything negative about the EU position so far (from within the EU), I'm actually surprised how well the EU have held the party line so far, of course that may change if the prospect of no deal starts to look more likely.

An acrimonious cliff edge hard Brexit would be disastrous for the UK, but it would clearly be painful for the EU as well.

LHW99

I'm actually surprised how well the EU have held the party line so far

Although supposedly there has been a draft document preparing for trade talks with the UK - even though according to the BBC the EU won't tell the UK anything about it oficially.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41604675
Not as open as the early days when the EU released details of a meeting with the PM (in London) which was supposed to be behind closed doors.

Thrugelmir

Filo25 wrote: »

That Danish minister seems to have been the only prominent politician really saying anything negative about the EU position so far (from within the EU), I'm actually surprised how well the EU have held the party line so far, of course that may change if the prospect of no deal starts to look more likely.

An acrimonious cliff edge hard Brexit would be disastrous for the UK, but it would clearly be painful for the EU as well.

For Denmark. The UK is their third largest export market (equal with Norway). After Germany and Sweden. Those with a vested interest will break ranks and voice concerns.

Lego is already suffering in terms of popularity as a childrens toy as it is.

BobQ

Filo25 wrote: »

That Danish minister seems to have been the only prominent politician really saying anything negative about the EU position so far (from within the EU), I'm actually surprised how well the EU have held the party line so far, of course that may change if the prospect of no deal starts to look more likely.

An acrimonious cliff edge hard Brexit would be disastrous for the UK, but it would clearly be painful for the EU as well.

Paying a reasonable contribution to future commitments like pensions and to things we benefit from is something that I suspect most people would accept. But if the EU wants us to pay more than what is reasonable then the public's view will be easily swayed to accepting "nd deal"

Personally I accept we must contribute to pensions and some UK people employed by the EU will benefit.

Roads is an interesting one. I think we should pay our share to any road building contracts initiated prior to Article 50, but after that ?

Liabilities need to be identified but the rest should be based on retaining some benefits to justify the expenditure.

BobQ

Thrugelmir wrote: »

For Denmark. The UK is their third largest export market (equal with Norway). After Germany and Sweden. Those with a vested interest will break ranks and voice concerns.

Lego is already suffering in terms of popularity as a childrens toy as it is.

I agree this will happen. But I do think that these reasonable views need to come forward now. I fear that the UK government and public opinion may increasingly move to such an entrenched position that "no deal" becomes the expected outcome as both sides dig in.

Thrugelmir

BobQ wrote: »

I agree this will happen. But I do think that these reasonable views need to come forward now. I fear that the UK government and public opinion may increasingly move to such an entrenched position that "no deal" becomes the expected outcome as both sides dig in.

I'm sure the views already exist. Just that they've never been publicly voiced before. Merkel and Macron, Barnier and Juncker don't run the EU.