Brexit tower thread (aka general brexit discussion) – page 24

Before you reply, just consider this. The net 8.6b a yr pays for the running of the EU, there are 42 agencies, of which 36 are regulatory bodies. I don’t know them all but post a hard brexit the UK will have to set-up their own regulatory bodies in these areas, effectively duplicating each one so it can locally regulate these activities. Some of the more well known ones are, note these 36 regulatory bodies need to be in place in 9 months in the event of a hard brexit, enev some soft brexit there’s no way the EU will let the UK avail of these without agreeing to ECJ governance and resolving disputes-I take this is a big no-no for T.May:

while we’re on money matters, what’s your take on the divorce bill, from my perspective the 40b is payment for existing services rendered, or due to be rendered, not a gift which some people seem to think.


The UK has to pay pension payments for EU civil servants that worked for them over the past 50 yrs, there’s funding for projects committed up to 2030, some of these will be in the UK and post a hard brexit the EU will fund these as they are committed. There are a lot of other commitments that make up the bill. It would be very wrong for the UK to not pay and I would imagine they will pay, but public perception is another thing, It would be interesting to hear your take on it ?

while we’re on money matters, what’s your take on the divorce bill, from my perspective the 40b is payment for existing services rendered, or due to be rendered, not a gift which some people seem to think. The UK has to pay pension payments for EU civil servants that worked for them over the past 50 yrs, there’s funding for projects committed up to 2030, some of these will be in the UK and post a hard brexit the EU will fund these as they are committed. There are a lot of other commitments that make up the bill. It would be very wrong for the UK to not pay and I would imagine they will pay, but public perception is another thing, It would be interesting to hear your take on it ?

Personally, I’d like to see an itemised bill for the however many billion is being demanded before forming an opinion on whether we should pay anything at all. The fact it is such a rounded figure tends to suggest that it was pulled out of the air. Wasn’t the original demand 100 billion, then there was talk of 60 billion? All nice round figures plucked out of the air.

Personally, I’d like to see an itemised bill for the however many billion is being demanded before forming an opinion on whether we should pay anything at all. The fact it is such a rounded figure tends to suggest that it was pulled out of the air. Wasn’t the original demand 100 billion, then there was talk of 60 billion? All nice round figures plucked out of the air.

Firstly the 100b and 60b numbers were plucked out of the air by the English press, totally fabricated and used to sell papers, a cynic would say the 100 and 60 number was released by the UK govt so they could at a later date say, look we did a great job and got the bill reduced to 40b. You can go look but you won’t find any EU rep mentioning a number, they always followed the plan—don’t mention a number until a number is agreed. The UK side spent months going through the "bill" line by line, and you can rest assured not 1 pound was committed to the EU unless it was a valid sum due. Hard brexit, soft brexit, crash out…no matter what the scenario this money is due.

For you to suggest it shouldn’t be paid at all shows a total lack of understanding what this sum of money represents, it’s not up to me to educate you on this, you should know how this is being calculated, you should know David Davis and his team scrutinised this sum. But its not a bill, an exit payment, a punishment. Its the UK facing up to commitments it has made and paying for them.