Brexit: Now What? Part III

[3point14]

Which no matter how you split it did not support what Boris had said. You can in the EU sell bananas in as single bananas.

You did not just do that?!

 

[Tolls]

I suspect the rationale from the EU is that; the UK, as members, committed to a number of long term initiatives that have on going year on year financial commitments. Those initiatives were agreed on the assumption that the UK would be contributing over the life of the projects.

It's not just the EU.
May knows we have these commitments.

It's a case of haggling over the amount.
It's still going to be fairly significant...just probably not €60 billion.

 

[ceptimus]

Which no matter how you split it did not support what Boris had said. You can in the EU sell bananas in as single bananas.

I never said otherwise. All I have ever posted here regarding bananas are the straight facts. I have each time said that Boris made a mistake, that the regulations only apply to the bulk wholesale of bananas, and that even then single bananas are not banned.

 

[Tolls]

And if you'd spent even a modicum of time following Boris' pronouncements against EU regulations over the years you wouldn't attribute that to Boris making a mistake.

 

[Andy_Ross]

I never said otherwise. All I have ever posted here regarding bananas are the straight facts. I have each time said that Boris made a mistake, that the regulations only apply to the bulk wholesale of bananas, and that even then single bananas are not banned.

He lied.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

I did post the link to the EU banana regulations.

But not an example of your claim that these regulations caused people to give up selling bananas.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

If we made a commitment to pay billions of euros, you can be certain that there are official documents to prove that. Show me the documents or I shall continue in my belief that there is no such commitment.

EU grants come with explicit clauses which say the money has to be returned if the projects are relocated out of the union. You are relying on having some pretty good lawyers to convince that this isn't what is happening

 

[Aber]

I suspect the rationale from the EU is that; the UK, as members, committed to a number of long term initiatives that have on going year on year financial commitments. Those initiatives were agreed on the assumption that the UK would be contributing over the life of the projects.

The pdf on this page is the only attempt I have seen to detail where the numbers come from.

http://www.cer.org.uk/publications/archive/policy-brief/2017/%E2%82%AC60-billion-brexit-bill-how-disentangle-britain-eu-budget

There seems to be an ongoing difference between the EU commitments and the EU budget, ie the EU is promising beneficiaries more than the EU members are prepared to pay, and the EU is looking to recoup Britain's share of this shortfall. They also seem to be looking for Britain to pay its share of spending on structural funds after it leaves.

Both of these look difficult to sell to the British public as fair, but if Britain doesn't pay then the EU either has to cut spending or get other countries to pay. It's not going to be quick or easy to resolve.

 

[Darat]

I never said otherwise. All I have ever posted here regarding bananas are the straight facts. I have each time said that Boris made a mistake, that the regulations only apply to the bulk wholesale of bananas, and that even then single bananas are not banned.

Sincerely sorry then, I had thought you said it wasn't a leave lie.

 

[3point14]

Spending shenanigans all round.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-39075244

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

If we made a commitment to pay billions of euros, you can be certain that there are official documents to prove that. Show me the documents or I shall continue in my belief that there is no such commitment.

The pdf on this page is the only attempt I have seen to detail where the numbers come from.

http://www.cer.org.uk/publications/archive/policy-brief/2017/%E2%82%AC60-billion-brexit-bill-how-disentangle-britain-eu-budget

There seems to be an ongoing difference between the EU commitments and the EU budget, ie the EU is promising beneficiaries more than the EU members are prepared to pay, and the EU is looking to recoup Britain's share of this shortfall. They also seem to be looking for Britain to pay its share of spending on structural funds after it leaves.

Both of these look difficult to sell to the British public as fair, but if Britain doesn't pay then the EU either has to cut spending or get other countries to pay. It's not going to be quick or easy to resolve.

Certainly would seem fairer to me than committing to pay for something and then leaving before the bill arrives.

Let's say the shoe was on the other foot and Spain or Romania was leaving. Do you think UKIP and the Daily mail would say it's fair that they leave with all the funds and grants money but don't have to pay anything for future commitments?

 

[Aber]

Let's say the shoe was on the other foot and Spain or Romania was leaving. Do you think UKIP and the Daily mail would say it's fair that they leave with all the funds and grants money but don't have to pay anything for future commitments?

I'm not sure that your analogy works this way round, as surely it would be Romania leaving and getting all the money they'd been promised in future but not yet received?

 

[ceptimus]

But not an example of your claim that these regulations caused people to give up selling bananas.

I never claimed that.

Excessive regulations are likely to make individuals or small companies not bother to try trading the regulated commodities - they are less likely to give up trading them if they already do so. But whether not bothering to start or giving up, it's not the sort of thing that they would normally formally document.

I know that companies I've worked for have sometimes turned down work and given 'paperwork would be a nightmare' as the reason - but I accept that although you may hear this sort of complaint often it's still only anecdotal evidence.

 

[ceptimus]

Certainly would seem fairer to me than committing to pay for something and then leaving before the bill arrives.

Let's say the shoe was on the other foot and Spain or Romania was leaving. Do you think UKIP and the Daily mail would say it's fair that they leave with all the funds and grants money but don't have to pay anything for future commitments?

Whether it's the UK or the hypothetical others, the fair way to do it is to stop or ramp down the contributions at the same rate that any benefits stop or ramp down.

As soon as we can legally stop paying contributions to the EU we should do so. Likewise I would expect the EU to stop paying us any grants that are not required by law at the same time.

As the UK has always been a net contributor to the EU, we could fund any existing payments from the EU out of those stopped contributions and still have money left over.

 

[ceptimus]

Spending shenanigans all round.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-39075244

The figure for the remain campaign spending omits the taxpayer's money that the government spent supporting remain.

For example Dave's wonderful EU leaflet sent to every household in the county that cost £9 million.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...ean-union-is-the-best-decision-for-the-uk.pdf

 

[McHrozni]

The Traitors' 'strategy' of fighting Tories on their own turf and support Brexit, come hell or high water, is already producing results.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-39076844

The Tories swept aside Labour, which had held the Cumbria seat for 80 years, to record the first by-election gain by a sitting government in 35 years.

Tories are spinning it as a great appeal of her Brexit movement, but in reality, it's most likely just voters punishing Labour for their treason. Expect many more of these in the near future. Corbyn apparently thinks he did splendid though. Brits are just plain weird.

McHrozni

 

[Andy_Ross]

UKIP flopped in their attempt to get their leader elected.

 

[jimbob]

UKIP flopped in their attempt to get their leader elected.

He is possibly more of a clown than Corbyn

 

[McHrozni]

I'm not sure that your analogy works this way round, as surely it would be Romania leaving and getting all the money they'd been promised in future but not yet received?

Suppose it was Sweden, then. Answer the question please.

McHrozni

 

[Aber]

Suppose it was Sweden, then. Answer the question please.

I don't think that UKIP or the Daily Mail would complain about Sweden leaving the EU without paying an exit charge (that was the question you asked). To them it is always the EU that is in the wrong.