Not really the way it works matey

The European Commission wants Britain to be paying into EU projects for four years after it has signed a Brexit deal, with final payments continuing up until the end of 2023, the Daily Telegraph has learned.

The plan is part of a European Union demand that Britain settles a €60bn “Brexit bill” before being granted a deal that will govern future trade relations.
..
The aim of the payments would be to help smooth over the €10bn-a-year black hole left in the EU budgets by Britain’s departure from the EU, which could see richer countries like Germany and France paying more, or poorer countries, like Poland and Hungary receiving less.

No, our bill isn’t determined by your post-our-departure budget.

24 comments on “Not really the way it works matey

  1. poorer countries, like Poland and Hungary receiving less. The country doesn’t receive it. What happens is that people receive it, usually already rich people in lower cost regions.

  2. The EU is ultimately just a criminal protection racket, isn’t it.

    If Britain doesn’t pay tens of billions of pounds the EU will prevent its remaining hostages from trading with us.

    Britain should keep the money and use some of it to send Red Cross parcels to EU citizens, like the ones delivered to Stalag Luft III.

  3. The European Commission believes that Britain should be allowed to off-set its share of the EU’s €154bn assets against its owings – comprised of annual budget commitments until 2019, pension obligations and other longer term liabilities.

    “Both France and Germany objected to this, but the Commission said it was hard to argue that Britain must pay up for its outstanding commitments while refusing to recognise its share of the EU’s assets,” the source said.

    Well that’s certainly telling.

  4. It would appear that the EU is beginning to realise that the UK is/was a very valuable member.
    If they’d realised that at the outset things might have been different.

  5. Dongguan John – “You never get rid of the Dane.”

    I wouldn’t mind except they are married to the fetid offspring of Kinnock these days.

    Britain was a massive net contributor to the EU budget for decades. We don’t owe them. They owe us. They want more money? They can shake down some French politicians’ Swiss bank accounts. I am sure they can find a few spare billions there.

  6. Our share of the assets should include the goodwill. That’s the value of the brand, not the peace to all nations bit.

  7. They also seem to be forgetting that they want continuing use of some of our assets – city of London, membership of various security assets, piggybacking our Nato commitments, etc.

  8. Andrew:

    Worst case scenario, it’s only four years. That’s what I keep telling Hillary voters.

    If they don’t get told to get to fuck now then in 4 years time they’ll find a reason for another shakedown.

  9. >It would appear that the EU is beginning to realise that the UK is/was a very valuable member.
    >If they’d realised that at the outset things might have been different.

    Yes. Losing your second highest net contributor may have been a mistake.

  10. Alastair,

    Does the EU brand have positive goodwill?

    Wat,

    You conjure up images of EU Commissioners paying Theresa May a visit, knocking things off her desk, upturning the waste basket and warning her “things do get broken, Mrs May”.

  11. I would tell them they better hope Putin does not invade, because we won’t be helping him and of course if he does find out about our attitude, then it might happen.

  12. They also seem to be forgetting that they want continuing use of some of our assets – city of London, membership of various security assets, piggybacking our Nato commitments, etc.

    Yes. What value do you place on another country’s effective military and their will to use it in your defence? Fuck all if you are a pisspot tiny European country which has been defended by others for 70 nears at zero cost to themselves.

  13. Oh the Irony. UK could not reform CAP and Fisheries as a member. Say no to this and may force them to.
    Save your money Theresa, nothing wrong with a bit of bilateral assistance if the slovenians are having a hard time wringing money out of the Germans and French.

  14. “The European Commission wants Britain to be paying into EU projects for four years after it has signed a Brexit deal, with final payments continuing up until the end of 2023, the Daily Telegraph has learned.”

    Looks like someone in Brussels has been reading the Art f the Deal,

  15. I wouldn’t mind paying for four more years provided that all the NATO members in the EU up their defence spending to 2% of GDP. At the moment Belgium gets away with little more than 0.5%, and most of the others aren’t much better.

  16. EL

    “All governments are protection rackets.”

    Are you claiming that is empirically true, or are you claiming that it is a necessary truth (ie that ‘protection racket’ is part of the meaning of ‘government’)? Or were you just having a bit of fun?

  17. Alex

    Belgium’s defence spend includes pension payments to ex military as per the NATO accounting standards. Something over a third if I recall correctly, so that .5% is more like .35%. It’ll be quite a shock to them to increase that to 2%, as if a >1.5% budget deficit has just opened up.

    Wonder what that will do to the Mastrict criterion of deficits below 3% to be a good Euro member? Ho ho ho

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.