Brexit News & Discussion v6: EU Leaders Go to Battle Over Plugging Post-Brexit Budget Gap

[Arkain2K]

U.K. to Trigger Brexit March 29, Starting Two Years of Talks
by Tim Ross and Ian Wishart | March 20, 2017

Prime Minister Theresa May will file divorce papers to leave the European Union on March 29, launching two years of complex negotiations that will pit the U.K.’s desire for a trade deal against the bloc’s view that Britain must not benefit from Brexit.

More than 40 years after the U.K. joined the EU and nine months since it voted to leave, Britain’s envoy to the bloc, Tim Barrow, informed EU President Donald Tusk on Monday of May’s plan to invoke Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, the mechanism for quitting that has never been used.

At stake in the looming talks is whether Britain -- the world’s sixth biggest economy -- can regain powers over immigration and lawmaking without derailing trade with its largest market or threatening London’s status as the region’s leading financial center. England’s 310-year-old union with Scotland is also in jeopardy, while the border separating Northern Ireland -- a U.K. province -- from the Republic of Ireland could become a hard one.

“I want to ensure we get the best possible deal for the United Kingdom,” May said during a visit to Swansea, Wales. The premier said her goals included getting “a good free-trade deal” with the EU and an agreement to collaborate on security after Brexit. “We are going to be out there, negotiating hard, delivering on what the British people voted for,” she said.

EU Ready

The EU is “ready to begin negotiations,” European Commission spokesman Margaritis Schinas told reporters in Brussels. The pound fell, reversing earlier gains, after the announcement. It was trading at $1.2348 at 4.32 p.m. in London, down 0.4 percent on the day. It earlier touched $1.2436, the strongest level this month.

For the EU, the focus will be on ensuring there is no easy ride for the British as it tries to safeguard the stability and the commitment of its 27 remaining member states to the postwar project of deepening economic and political union. It is also tested by growing nationalism at home and meddling from beyond by Russian President Vladimir Putin and U.S. President Donald Trump.

May will soon be working against the clock. Realistically, she has until the end of 2018 to agree the terms of the breakup and try to win the trade deal she wants. If she can’t secure an agreement, Britain will crash out of the EU and over what businesses call a “cliff edge” of uncertainty and higher trade tariffs.

Election Talk

No details of the communication with Tusk’s office were disclosed. EU leaders plan an initial response within two days of May triggering Article 50, before convening a summit in late April or early May to ratify guidelines for their chief Brexit negotiator, Michel Barnier. Officials have said they may wait until June to engage fully, and then German elections in September could serve as another distraction.

There is speculation that May could also try to trigger an election in the U.K., in the hope of winning a bigger majority in Parliament and her own mandate to strengthen her hand at home and in the Brexit talks. Her spokesman, James Slack, rejected the idea of an early election on Monday, telling reporters: “There isn’t going to be one.”

The British premier is up against European leaders who are showing no desire to give her generous terms, fearing that would encourage exit campaigners elsewhere. The EU is already planning to focus the early part of talks on the exit fee -- estimated as high as 60 billion euros ($64 billion) -- and May has been told she won’t be allowed to “cherry-pick” the best bits of EU membership without bearing the costs.

‘Vicious’

Irish Prime Minister Enda Kenny has warned the talks could turn “vicious’’ and European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker has predicted they will be “very, very, very difficult.” David Davis, the U.K. Brexit Secretary, is readying for what “may be the most complicated negotiation of all time.”

May has conceded Britain will have to quit the single market for goods and services -- accounting for about 44 percent of its exports -- to avoid being bound by European court rulings and the free movement of migrants. She says it would be “rational” for the EU to agree to her terms given the amount of goods and services its companies ship to the U.K. and the security her government provides the continent.

While May says “no deal for Britain is better than a bad deal for Britain," quitting the bloc without a pact or more time to negotiate one would leave the country exposed to World Trade Organization tariffs, putting duties of around 10 percent on car exports alone. Strengthening May’s hand to push for a so-called hard or clean Brexit is the fact the U.K. economy is defying predictions that voting to leave the EU will spark a recession.

High-Wire Act

Still, signs are emerging that consumer spending -- the engine of the British economy --is starting to slow as the pound’s 17 percent decline since the June 23 referendum drives up inflation.

May faces a high-wire act during the two years of talks. She campaigned to remain in the EU but must now navigate the exit, after succeeding David Cameron, who resigned when he lost the referendum. Having already faced pushback, first from the Supreme Court and then from parliamentarians, she leads a Conservative Party split between lawmakers who want a clean, swift break and those who worry she risks hurting the economy. Fresh calls for a second independence referendum in Scotland from First Minister Nicola Sturgeon only intensify the pressure on the prime minister.

An early flashpoint will be the bill Barnier wants to present Britain with. EU officials say they aren’t willing to discuss trade until that’s settled and that the matter could take until early 2018 to resolve in a best-case scenario. A worst case would see the talks break down prematurely. Other points to be discussed early in the talks include border issues and rights of EU citizens residing in the U.K. as well as Britons living in the bloc.

‘Incredibly Complex’

May’s team has questioned the size of the bill and how much legal obligation Britain is under to pay it. It wants to discuss the exit and the new free-trade deal together, to save time, give businesses certainty and to preserve bargaining power. The two sides may also have to line up a transitional phase to bridge leaving the bloc and new trade rules with banks threatening to shift staff from London if they don’t get time to adjust.

“This is not only the beginning of the process, it’s also the beginning of a process by which the delusions of the Brexiteers will have a very brutal collision with reality,” former U.K. Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg said in an interview. “Now they actually have to negotiate with 27 other governments and parliaments -- it’s going to be incredibly complex.”

Brexit Minister David Jones told a panel of lawmakers the government is making contingency plans because it is “quite possible” the Brexit talks will collapse without a deal, though he insisted he’s expecting a successful negotiation.

In a sign the U.K. is preparing to fight the EU over paying to leave the bloc, Jones said he welcomed an “extremely helpful” recent report from lawmakers that said Britain could legally quit the bloc without stumping up anything.

The U.K. will publish a paper plan “soon” setting out proposals for a ”Great Repeal Bill,” incorporating EU law into British law on the day the country leaves the bloc, he said. A “large number” of other detailed draft laws will follow, paving the way for the U.K.’s new migration rules and other areas of specific legislation that will need to replace EU laws.

https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/...to-start-brexit-talks-as-may-sets-trigger-day

 

[Arkain2K]

Philip Hammond 'does not recognise' EU demands for a £50 billion Brexit 'divorce bill'
Laura Hughes | March 21, 2017

Britain's Chancellor of the Exchequer Philip Hammond​

Philip Hammond "does not recognise" European Union demands for a £50 billion Brexit "divorce bill", a source close to the Chancellor has said.

It comes amid reports that Brexit supporting Cabinet ministers have told Mr Hammond to cap any "Brexit bill' at a maximum of £3 billion.

Discussion of Britain's exit settlement is likely to dominate the coming weeks after Theresa May confirmed her intention to trigger Article 50 next Wenesday.

Mr Hammond has been told by minister's that they are “categorically against paying in a big lump sum” to cover Britain’s liabilities once it quits the EU, according to the Times.

Some estimates have put the expected bill - for previously made spending commitments and pension liabilities - at around £50 billion.

One senior Government source told the newspaper: “As the Prime Minister said, we do not want to pay huge sums,”

"We think anything over £2 billion or £3 billion is not possible. There are those round the Cabinet table who think we are going to have to pay a huge amount to get out, and the Chancellor is on that side.”

Another added: “We are categorically against paying in a big lump sum. Nor do they want it agreed before trade negotiations.

“People are horrified by the chancellor’s suggestion of paying the bills that are owed.”

Speaking at the weekend Mr Hammond accused Brussels of "overstating" its position ahead of the negotiations.

A source close to Mr Hammond drew attention to those comments, adding: "We don't recognise the 60 billion."

It follows warnings from Michel Barnier, the chief negotiator for Brussels, that the UK must keep paying “tens of billions” annually into the EU budget until 2020.

The £50 billion bill would include the UK’s share of outstanding pensions liabilities, loan guarantees and spending on UK-based projects.

Jean-Claude Juncker has warned the European Union will demand a "very hefty" Brexit divorce bill.

The Commission President said Theresa May will not be able to negotiate a "cut-price or zero-cost" Brexit and will have to settle the bill for commitments which it entered into as a long standing member.

Sir Ivan Rogers, the UK's former man in Brussels, has said that Brexit has exploded a "bomb" under the European Union's budget and it will seek to claw back money from the UK.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...s-not-recognise-eu-demands-50-billion-brexit/

 

[JDragon]

Philip Hammond 'does not recognise' EU demands for a £50 billion Brexit 'divorce bill'

It is going to be very hard to find an agreement if the British want to ignore the duties they signed up for at the beginning of the current period. The amount is probably negotiable (though it does seem completely reasonably calculated from what I have read).

I see May walking away from these negotiations before the end of the year.

 

[whougonnacall]

It is going to be very hard to find an agreement if the British want to ignore the duties they signed up for at the beginning of the current period. The amount is probably negotiable (though it does seem completely reasonably calculated from what I have read).

I see May walking away from these negotiations before the end of the year.

Yeah i cant see how they plan to not pay for the uk based spending projects ....one way or another the uk has to pick up the bill there if its leaving.

 

[Bagatur]

I dont get this divorce bill. can anyone enlighten me what is it for? is it a fine in EU constitution for leaving EU? that would be kind of fucked up. is it how much money GB owes to EU? I doubt it, they are one of the strongest economies in the EU and if anything, EU probably owes them money. is it just out of spite? then why 50, not 5 or 100?

 

[Goonerview]

lol, the EU can f**k off. Trying to hold us to ransom. I say we use our military and force our Brexit if need be.

 

[Boost6]

lol, the EU can f**k off. Trying to hold us to ransom. I say we use our military and force our Brexit if need be.

I'm with you brother, target Berlin first. Who's gonna stop you ? the French lol.

 

[Goonerview]

I'm with you brother, target Berlin first. Who's gonna stop you ? the French lol.

I just say we unilaterally shred the EU treaties, place our militaries at our borders and forcibly take back our own soil.

Pour concrete into the channel tunnel if need be.

If the EU try and reclaim the UK, we fight. We don't have to bomb Europe.

 

[Arkain2K]

It is going to be very hard to find an agreement if the British want to ignore the duties they signed up for at the beginning of the current period. The amount is probably negotiable (though it does seem completely reasonably calculated from what I have read).

I see May walking away from these negotiations before the end of the year.

I hope they will publicize an itemized list for us to look at soon, consider the WILDLY differences in calculations from each party:

Michel Barnier, the European Union’s chief Brexit negotiator, is set to demand a €57bn (£48bn) payment from the UK to the leave the bloc.

The figure was purportedly agreed at a meeting of member states, although Sky News reported that France and Germany called for the UK to be charged at least €70bn.

Of course, we also have plenty of Brits who don't want their government to pay a single penny into the E.U coffers after Brexit, not when the pompous E.U politicians are unnecessarily acting like total asshats before negotiation begins:

U.K. May Be Set for Early Clash Over Brexit Costs
www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-03-04/u-k-has-no-obligation-to-pay-eu-in-no-deal-brexit-lords-say

 

[JDragon]

I hope they will publicize an itemized list for us to look at soon, consider the WILDLY differences in calculations from each party:



Of course, we also have plenty of Brits who don't want their government to pay a single penny into the E.U coffers after Brexit, when the E.U politicians are unnecessarily acting like total asshats before negotiation begins:

U.K. May Be Set for Early Clash Over Brexit Costs
www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-03-04/u-k-has-no-obligation-to-pay-eu-in-no-deal-brexit-lords-say

That's a matter of perspective. Aren't you the one saying you should pay what you agreed to?

 

[Arkain2K]

That's a matter of perspective. Aren't you the one saying you should pay what you agreed to?

If Germany withdraws from NATO and no longer enjoys the club's #1 perk of being protected by the entire alliance, I don't think anyone would actually expects (much less demands) Germany to continue contributing into future NATO budget that it previously agreed to as a member. Certainly not billions towards the pension funds for NATO officials.

We have yet to see an itemized list for this "Brexit Divorce Bill" to see the category breakdowns, but I'm willing to bet that at least SOME of the obligations Britain previously agreed to pay to Brussels as an E.U member no longer make any sense when it no longer receive any of the membership benefits in return.

Personally, I finds it rather mind-boggling (and self-defeating) for the E.U to demands that the U.K continue paying ALL their "E.U obligations" for years on end after leaving, while simultaneously being adamant that the U.K should "suffer" and get NONE of the current membership perks the moment it cease to be an E.U member. This is every bit as stupid as Boris Johnson claiming that he could "have the cake and eat it too".

How exactly do they think the E.U's rotten attitude leading into the negotiation will go down in an European power that, for all intends and purposes, the E.U still need to work with in the future? Keep that antagonistic crap flowing and even the most ardent Europhiles on the British Isle (like the Guardians editorial staff) would soon finds themselves having a hard time criticizing Theresa May.

Brexit could be an ugly divorce, or Brexit could be the beginning of a new mutually-beneficial partnership between European allies, and the future of Britain-E.U relations hinges upon how the E.U elites wants it to be.

“The forthcoming negotiations will be more than just a trial of strength,” Falkner said. “They will be about establishing a stable, cooperative and amicable relationship between the U.K. and the EU. This will not be possible without good will on both sides.”

 

[Rav1nHunter]

Britain needs to put it's 50 Billion into the Navy then blockade the north sea fuck these German dogs.

 

[moneyfight]

 

[JDragon]

If Germany withdraws from NATO and no longer enjoys the club's #1 perk of being protected by the entire alliance, I don't actually expects Germany to be forced by anyone to continue contributing into future NATO budget that it previously agreed to as a member. Certainly not to the pension funds for NATO generals.

We have yet to see an itemized list for this "Brexit Divorce Bill" to see the category breakdowns, but I'm willing to bet that at least SOME of the obligations Britain previously agreed to pay to Brussels as an E.U member no longer make any sense when it no longer receive any of the membership benefits in return.

Personally, I finds it rather mind-boggling (and self-defeating) for the E.U to demands that the U.K continue paying all their "E.U obligations" for years on end after leaving, while simultaneously being adamant that the U.K should "suffer" and shouldn't get any of the current membership perks the moment it cease to be an E.U member. This is every bit as stupid as Boris Johnson claiming that he could "have the cake and eat it too".
How exactly do they think the E.U's rotten attitude leading into the negotiation will go down in an European power that, for all intends and purposes, the E.U still need to work with in the future? Keep that antagonistic crap flowing and even the most ardent Europhiles on the British Isle (like the Guardians editorial staff) would soon finds themselves having a hard time criticizing Theresa May.

Brexit could be an ugly divorce, or Brexit could be the beginning of a new mutually-beneficial partnership between European allies, and the future of Britain-E.U relations hinges upon how the E.U elites wants to be.

So far, May has offered zero-nada-nill cooperative attitude. And yes, we haven't seen an itemized list yet, but all reports so far indicate it ain't bullshit content-wise. Even if it's off 10 billion or so, these costs are real and Britain agreed to pay them. If you lease a car and stop driving it, your contract still runs. So I completely get that it seems absurd from a UK point of view, but this bill is simply the result of the EU doing their homework and actually preparing for Brexit. Somebody gotta pay, and by definition, it's the British. If they want a deal but want to cop out of their bill, then they gotta offer something in return but the attitude of a spoilt child.

 

[Jorge Luis Borges]

If Germany withdraws from NATO and no longer enjoys the club's #1 perk of being protected by the entire alliance, I don't actually expects Germany to be forced by anyone to continue contributing into future NATO budget that it previously agreed to as a member. Certainly not to the pension funds for NATO generals.

We have yet to see an itemized list for this "Brexit Divorce Bill" to see the category breakdowns, but I'm willing to bet that at least SOME of the obligations Britain previously agreed to pay to Brussels as an E.U member no longer make any sense when it no longer receive any of the membership benefits in return.

Personally, I finds it rather mind-boggling (and self-defeating) for the E.U to demands that the U.K continue paying all their "E.U obligations" for years on end after leaving, while simultaneously being adamant that the U.K should "suffer" and shouldn't get any of the current membership perks the moment it cease to be an E.U member. This is every bit as stupid as Boris Johnson claiming that he could "have the cake and eat it too".

How exactly do they think the E.U's rotten attitude leading into the negotiation will go down in an European power that, for all intends and purposes, the E.U still need to work with in the future? Keep that antagonistic crap flowing and even the most ardent Europhiles on the British Isle (like the Guardians editorial staff) would soon finds themselves having a hard time criticizing Theresa May.

Brexit could be an ugly divorce, or Brexit could be the beginning of a new mutually-beneficial partnership between European allies, and the future of Britain-E.U relations hinges upon how the E.U elites wants to be.

It's funny you bring up NATO, because recent events have highlighted German and French refusal to live up to financial agreements they had agreed to with NATO. They don't exactly have the moral high ground when it comes to meeting obligations imo.

 

[Jorge Luis Borges]

Brexit could be an ugly divorce, or Brexit could be the beginning of a new mutually-beneficial partnership between European allies, and the future of Britain-E.U relations hinges upon how the E.U elites wants to be.

Doesn't the EU have incentive to make Brexit harder rather than easier? After all, the British surely won't be the last to consider leaving.

 

[Boost6]

Ohh yes EUSR crumbles.

On a serious note UK would be insane to pay anything near that, The EucRats have made it openly known to all they want to fuck over and punish them for the audacity of leaving their club. Once out of the club not a single pound should be sent their way.

 

[Jorge Luis Borges]

So far, May has offered zero-nada-nill cooperative attitude. And yes, we haven't seen an itemized list yet, but all reports so far indicate it ain't bullshit content-wise. Even if it's off 10 billion or so, these costs are real and Britain agreed to pay them. If you lease a car and stop driving it, your contract still runs. So I completely get that it seems absurd from a UK point of view, but this bill is simply the result of the EU doing their homework and actually preparing for Brexit. Somebody gotta pay, and by definition, it's the British. If they want a deal but want to cop out of their bill, then they gotta offer something in return but the attitude of a spoilt child.

Hopefully, a compromise can be reached. If the Brits owe, they should pay, but the EU should also take into account all the British money flowing into projects elsewhere in Europe. Your analogy of a car being leased demonstrates an attitude that the British involvement with the EU has been a one way street, where London took and never gave. This seems implausible.

 

[JDragon]

Hopefully, a compromise can be reached. If the Brits owe, they should pay, but the EU should also take into account all the British money flowing into projects elsewhere in Europe. Your analogy of a car being leased demonstrates an attitude that the British involvement with the EU has been a one way street, where London took and never gave. This seems implausible.

Eventually, even if it's a fair bill, it's beside the point because ultimately nobody can force Britain to pay (technically the European Court of Justice can, but how do you enforce it?). But it shows something that Brexiteers are stubbornly ignoring:

You.
Cannot.
Have.
Your.
Cake.
And.
Eat.
It.

Brexit is possible, but it is not as easy as breaking up with your teenage sweetheart in high school. It's an ugly divorce after a long marriage, and before you can discuss what your future relationship will look like, you need to get the basics in order.

 

[Jorge Luis Borges]

Eventually, even if it's a fair bill, it's beside the point because ultimately nobody can force Britain to pay (technically the European Court of Justice can, but how do you enforce it?). But it shows something that Brexiteers are stubbornly ignoring:

You.
Cannot.
Have.
Your.
Cake.
And.
Eat.
It.

Brexit is possible, but it is not as easy as breaking up with your teenage sweetheart in high school. It's an ugly divorce after a long marriage, and before you can discuss what your future relationship will look like, you need to get the basics in order.

No doubt Brexit is more like a divorce than a break up, but there is no necessity that it be ugly. From my vantage point it sounds like you want them to repay EU money spent in Britain. Will the British be refunded their money that was spent elsewhere in the EU? Again, you act as if London was all take and no give when it came to Europe, which does not seem to be the case.

I think losing money spent in provinces one no longer holds is part of what you called the imperial premium yesterday. No doubt Britain ought to pay, but the political reality is that they are likely to pay far less than you think they ought. From one hegemonic power to another, believe me that as an American I sympathize with the Germans. It's hard to get people to pay what they pledge to pay.