|
In order to ensure that this thread meets TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we ask that everyone please adhere to this mod note. Posts containing only Tweets or articles adds nothing to the discussions. Therefore, when providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments will be actioned upon. All in all, please continue to enjoy posting in TL General and partake in discussions as much as you want! But please be respectful when posting or replying to someone. There is a clear difference between constructive criticism/discussion and just plain being rude and insulting. https://www.registertovote.service.gov.uk |
On November 29 2017 18:42 Velr wrote:
Well, is there an actual bargaining chip that the UK could play? If these costs can be shown to exist the EU would either have to show Goodwill or get something in return. Is there something the UK could and is willing to give?
Not legally obliged to pay the money that was the main bargaining chip along with access to our market after we leave.
|
On November 29 2017 18:42 Velr wrote:
Well, is there an actual bargaining chip that the UK could play? If these costs can be shown to exist the EU would either have to show Goodwill or get something in return. Is there something the UK could and is willing to give?
45 and 55 billion euros
Pretty much that by the sound of it.
|
Gonna be a tough sell I think.
|
https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/eu-divorce-bill
If you read the above link you find some details on how the divorce bill was calculated:
1. Outstanding budget commitments
The EU Budget operates through a multi-annual spending structure, which means projects are paid for over a period of several years. As a result, EU Budget payments are back-loaded and many will be paid out post-Brexit. For example, a key element of EU spending allocations consists of cohesion fund payments, aimed at raising living standards in the 2004 Accession countries. According to the CER, only 25–30% of the biggest cohesion fund payments will actually have been spent by the time Britain is expected to leave the EU in April 2019.
The current EU Budget period runs from 2014–2020, finishing a year after the UK’s exit date. A key point of legal uncertainty is the status of financial commitments scheduled for 2019 and 2020. The UK has indicated that it only expects to fund its budget commitments up until April 2019. However, the Commission's methodology is clear that the UK should meet the full schedule of obligations up until 2020.
2. EU officials’ pensions
Like the UK civil service pension scheme, the Pension Scheme of European Officials (PESO) is an unfunded scheme and operates on a ‘pay-as-you-go basis’, with costs being covered by the annual EU Budget as they arise. The Commission outlines that the UK should make a payment to cover the costs associated with this scheme, as they appear in the EU's consolidated accounts at the time of the UK's withdrawal. There have been suggestions that the UK could push for this liability to simply cover the costs of UK nationals working for the Commission, lowering the bill due to the under-representation of British officials. The Commission's methodology suggests that the EU would contest such an approach.
3. Contingent liabilities
The EU incurred contingent liabilities while the UK was a member state. These liabilities effectively constitute payments that would be triggered in specific circumstances only, for example, Ukraine defaulting on its EU loan. When the 2015 EU accounts were drawn up, outstanding loans to Hungary, Ireland, Portugal and Ukraine collectively amounted to €49.5 billion. The EU’s latest approach asks the UK to make a lump-sum payment upfront to cover these liabilities, in case they materialise in the future. This increases the upfront divorce bill by €9–12 billion. However, these upfront liability payments would be reimbursed over the coming years, enabling the UK to recover some of this money.
4. Other costs of withdrawal
The Commission’s negotiating mandate also includes the “specific costs related to the withdrawal process”. This would cover the relocation of the two London-based EU agencies after Brexit; the European Banking Authority and the European Medicines Agency. Other costs include the decommissioning of the Joint Research Centre nuclear sites and funding British teachers seconded to European schools until 2021.
|
I wish Bardtown was still here to offer his views on the bill.
|
United States44203 Posts
If the May government puts this to a vote the May government will fall. That's always been the issue for the EU in terms of winning these negotiations. Their win condition in the negotiations is more than the loser can ever give them.
|
On November 29 2017 23:34 KwarK wrote:
If the May government puts this to a vote the May government will fall. That's always been the issue for the EU in terms of winning these negotiations. Their win condition in the negotiations is more than the loser can ever give them.
Well the responsibility is also a huge hot potatoe. You downvote the goverment and they fall then you own brexit after that. People will hate paying 44 billion but they wont love a hard exit either. Politically putting it to a vote and loosing the vote might even be preferable because you can hand back the issue to the opposition. Unless everyone is fine with letting Nigel Farage run brexit and then picking up the chips as they lie when its over.
|
Would it be smart to break down the deal into smaller, "officially" separate deals? The cost stays the same but the goverment gets to announce it in parts so there should be less outrage among the public.
|
On November 29 2017 23:10 Laurens wrote:
I wish Bardtown was still here to offer his views on the bill.
His view was that Theresa May is a genius negotiator who will leave the EU without having to pay a bill. Even if the EU demanded a bill, UK would not pay as it would be going for a hard brexit. He dealt with the increasing cognitive dissonance with reality by saying fuck you to everybody and leaving TL.
|
On November 30 2017 05:02 Dangermousecatdog wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2017 23:10 Laurens wrote:
I wish Bardtown was still here to offer his views on the bill. His view was that Theresa May is a genius negotiator who will leave the EU without having to pay a bill. Even if the EU demanded a bill, UK would not pay as it would be going for a hard brexit. He dealt with the increasing cognitive dissonance with reality by saying fuck you to everybody and leaving TL.
Pretty sure he didn't like May.
But the rest is pretty correct. Don't pay, hard brexit
|
You forget something about better more awesome trade arrangements with everyone except the guys right next to you...
|
He didn't like May till she was Prime Minister, in which case she's a genius for formerly being against brexit, for appointing Boris Johnston as foreign secretary, because "keeps enemies close" is a genius tactic, contesting the iron clad rights of parliament is a genius tactic "to distract the remoaners" and playing chicken with the EU is a genius tactic and generally not having any plans for brexit at all is a genius tactic because "she holds all the cards now". I am not making this up.
|
|
|
United Kingdom10443 Posts
On December 01 2017 03:11 kollin wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-42179387Can't help but feel that this will ultimately bring the government down. The Irish conundrum has no practical solutions as of yet, and I can't imagine the Tories are capable of coming up with one.
Everytime I read anything about Brexit I am struck by how stupid it was to have a referendum on it. Like here's an incredibly complex and important political decision, but rather than have experts look carefully at our position and try to negotiate inside the eu. Lets ask random Joe in the street "do you want to leave the EU" because it's just that simple right. Then the majority of Joe decides to vote leave because he doesn't like polish people and no one has a fucking clue what to do.
Everyday I wish it wasn't going to happen but the fact that people called for, and Cameron agreed to, a referundum is so stupid.
|
Does anyone know if anyother government could reverse the brexit before its final during this 2 year window the negotiations are suppose to happen in?
|
United States44203 Posts
On December 01 2017 03:34 Sermokala wrote:
Does anyone know if anyother government could reverse the brexit before its final during this 2 year window the negotiations are suppose to happen in?
They could definitely try.
Due to Parliamentary sovereignty, there is literally nothing a majority of MPs cannot do. Parliament could vote today to simply drop Brexit attempts, it wouldn't take a change of government, or even government consent or approval. The question is whether the EU would let them now they've invoked the exit process.
|
|
|
|
|
The problem with the "exit bill" is that UK media is intent on presenting it as a "bill" or a "fine" to be imposed on the British people by the continentals as punishment for leaving. The pro EU media thinks paying the fine is worth it in order to get a trade deal and the anti EU media thinks it's bollocks.
Obviously the British people are on net against paying a fine as punishment for a democratic decision they made, which is why it's going to be insanely difficult to get the bill through parliament.
But from the EU perspective it's not a fine, and it's not punishment. It's simply about other governments not wanting to get stuck paying for things the UK already agreed to pay for. Some of those things are more reasonable than others, obviously the UK should pay for the pensions of the people that worked for the EU during the time the UK derived the benefits of EU membership. However should the UK really be expected to pay cohesion funds for 2020? Personally I would say no.
But in any case the negotiations should be about agreeing to a set of liabilities. After the liabilities are agreed to whatever number comes out is the relevant one. Negotiating a number in a vacuum as some sort of "fine" makes it seem ridiculous, and naturally the British people would revolt against paying such a fine.
|
Going to be interesting to see how many articles there will be about this cost of brexit compared to how many articles there were about the 850 billion pound bill it cost to bail out UK banks after the GFC, a figure that will be dwarfed by the next bank bailout during the next global crisis.It's all a total joke if you ask me.Total extortion, rich get richer poor get poorer, damned if you do damned if you don't.
www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/163850bn-official-cost-of-the-bank-bailout-1833830.html?amp
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
