2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Until the final deal is signed there is no dividend.

 

How a dividend that does not yet exist is allocated to the NHS buget is anyone’s guess.

You really are trying to take stupidity to a new level.

 

The UK is leaving the EU.

 

A final deal, as you put it, does not change that. 

 

That frees up a minimum of £8 Billion a year in EU budget contributions.

 

It also frees up the other untold £ Billions that goes annually into all the other EU funds that the UK contributes to.

 

I am sure you are smart enough to do your own research and find out what these funds are ?

48 minutes ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

***If you read the articles you linked, the government can’t actually say where any of their proposed spending is coming from other than vaguely pointing at taxes and a Brexit Dividend that doesn’t yet exist, if it ever will***

 

Do you really understand so little about this, or are you trying to wind people up?

 

Are you completely unaware that the UK is a net contributor to the EU to the tune of more than £8 Billion per year, which when we leave the EU we will no longer pay = Brexit Dividend

 

Considering the official position of the government, which has accepted the Office for Budget Responsibility's forecast of a reduction in public finances of 15 billion a year due to Brexit, what 8 billion dividend?

https://www.ft.com/content/bbfde9c2-709e-11e8-852d-d8b934ff5ffa

3 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

You really are trying to take stupidity to a new level.

 

The UK is leaving the EU.

 

A final deal, as you put it, does not change that. 

 

That frees up a minimum of £8 Billion a year in EU budget contributions.

 

It also frees up the other untold £ Billions that goes annually into all the other EU funds that the UK contributes to.

 

I am sure you are smart enough to do your own research and find out what these funds are ?

why not wait for the waiter to deliver the bill before we decide how much money will be left in the wallet.

3 hours ago, The Renegade said:

They lied !! They promised £350 million a week for the NHS they squealed !!

 

Apparently May has went even higher

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/06/16/350m-extra-week-nhs-hunt-announces-theresa-may-locks-britain/

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu-nhs/britains-may-to-pledge-20-billion-pound-health-service-cash-boost-reports-idUSKBN1JC10P

 

Time to wake up to reality. As much as it hurts and scares you, the UK IS LEAVING the EU.

 

Edited to add:

 

It is also in the remainers Bible, the Guardian, so it must be true ?

 

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/jun/16/may-to-unveil-20-billion-pound-a-year-nhs-boost

Certainly good news for the NHS! Who could complain about that?

 

Stinks of desperation though and worth reading the detail.

 

It just brings NHS investment back to the average levels seen before austerity and still way below the Blair/Brown era

 

 

 

Full benefits will not be seen until 2023! 5 years from now.

 

3p on basic rate being discussed - still far below what is really required for a civilised society.

 

So, great headline but study the small print....

1 minute ago, The Renegade said:

You really are trying to take stupidity to a new level.

 

The UK is leaving the EU.

 

A final deal, as you put it, does not change that. 

 

That frees up a minimum of £8 Billion a year in EU budget contributions.

 

It also frees up the other untold £ Billions that goes annually into all the other EU funds that the UK contributes to.

 

I am sure you are smart enough to do your own research and find out what these funds are ?

Putting aside your habitual personal insults.

 

You din’t know what the final deal is, it may for example follow the Nowegien model of EU market access, paying into the EU but with no say on EU policy.

 

So please, there is no ‘Brexit Dividend’ until the final deal is signed.

 

Neither the government nor Brexit supporters know what that deal is.

 

Allocating a ‘Brexit Dividend ‘ That does not, and may never, exist is nonsense.

4 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

You really are trying to take stupidity to a new level.

 

The UK is leaving the EU.

 

A final deal, as you put it, does not change that. 

 

That frees up a minimum of £8 Billion a year in EU budget contributions.

 

It also frees up the other untold £ Billions that goes annually into all the other EU funds that the UK contributes to.

 

I am sure you are smart enough to do your own research and find out what these funds are ?

 

See above post, there is no 8 billion, nor are there any other billions to be saved as Leave pledged to keep funding all the other things post Brexit.

8 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

Considering the official position of the government, which has accepted the Office for Budget Responsibility's forecast of a reduction in public finances of 15 billion a year due to Brexit, what 8 billion dividend?

https://www.ft.com/content/bbfde9c2-709e-11e8-852d-d8b934ff5ffa

This link has just taken me onto a Financial Times subscription page, not onto an article ??

2 hours ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

Remainers head’s remain deeply buried in the sand. Not one single remainer on this forum has been prepared to react or respond to the current issues facing the EU, even though I have posted in detail about them. Instead, they content themselves with recycling old economic and unemployment forecasts, posting cartoons, irrelevant third party links or other meaningless drivel.

In Germany, the Interior Minister, Horst Seehofer is in open revolt with Chancellor  Merkel over immigration, in a move that could signal the end of her term of office. He is seeking an unofficial alliance with Austria and Italy to change the EU policy on immigration.

 

This unofficial alliance is now receiving support from President Macron, as he realigns himself with the current (populist) feelings, that are flowing like a tidal wave through Europe. These are the real issues that are changing the very structure of the Union, as the UK negotiates with them about Brexit, but not a peep out of any remainers, or, significantly, Jean Claude Junker about the issues that really matter

 

When are "remainers" going to face up to the fact that the EU is in terminal decline, as more and more voters in individual countries turn their backs on the ‘Federal  State of Europe’ dream, because they can see that free movement and fiscal union are insuperable obstacles.. 

We all see the various difficulties that the EU faces. However, whereas many of us are concerned and hope for changes to avoid fracture; others express glee. Shameful in my opinion. Schadenfreude is as unwelcome as it is un-British.

2 minutes ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

This link has just taken me onto a Financial Times subscription page, not onto an article ??

 

You could try this article instead.

 

Quote

Brexit is forecast by the Office for Budget Responsibility (and every other major body) to harm, rather than improve, the public finances. After the referendum, the OBR estimated a net fiscal cost of £15bn a year (or nearly £300m a week) by 2020/21. Reduced EU trade and lower immigration - which May has explicitly stated will result - will depress government revenue. As Paul Johnson, the director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, has said: “There is no Brexit dividend. Payments to the EU will fall [after Brexit], but tax revenues will fall more as a result of Brexit.”

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/health/2018/06/there-no-brexit-dividend-spend-nhs

11 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Certainly good news for the NHS! Who could complain about that?

 

Stinks of desperation though and worth reading the detail.

 

It just brings NHS investment back to the average levels seen before austerity and still way below the Blair/Brown era

 

 

 

Full benefits will not be seen until 2023! 5 years from now.

 

3p on basic rate being discussed - still far below what is really required for a civilised society.

 

So, great headline but study the small print....

Great graph Grouse.

 

Now how about posting another graph telling us all how a very large part of that increase was down to appointing Management and Senior Management that was not required ?

 

Quote

NHS statistics indicate that 22,173 managers and senior managers worked for the NHS in England in 1997. In September 2010 that figure was 41,962 (both of which are headcounts rather than full-time workers).  This represents a 90 per cent increase.

https://fullfact.org/news/did-nhs-spending-managers-rise-450-under-labour/

2 minutes ago, Grouse said:

We all see the various difficulties that the EU faces. However, whereas many of us are concerned and hope for changes to avoid fracture. Others express glee. Shameful in my opinion. Schadenfreude is unwelcome.

Yet you slag off the UK Gov sorting out Brexit...You also don't understand that the EU still has the UK as a member with all the EU ploblems...

2 minutes ago, transam said:

Yet you slag off the UK Gov sorting out Brexit...You also don't understand that the EU still has the UK as a member with all the EU ploblems...

The UK is a ploblem in itself

19 minutes ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

This link has just taken me onto a Financial Times subscription page, not onto an article ??

You don't take the FT? You'll be saying you don't read The Economist next!

 

Good idea to keep up with the serious press IMHO. ?

2 minutes ago, soalbundy said:

The UK is a ploblem in itself

I don't take any notice of a German "convert", none....

23 minutes ago, soalbundy said:

I don't think all that money, if any, can be used as if it was a windfall, Brexit is also going to cost money, new institutions to replace the EU ones, increased customs recruitment,equipment,infrastructure, and deprived areas will still want the missing EU investment, there is the possibility of increased unemployment benefits to be paid and maybe incentive payments to firms not to relocate to Europe (Japanese car manufacturers ? ) then there are the structured divorce payments to the EU, all this will probably cost more than the 'windfall'. May is telling porkies but she will be gone before PMQ's can embarrass her.

"then there are the structured divorce payments to the EU".

 

Yes, I for one am paying close attention to this.  Why on earth should the uk pay the eu  anything once they have left - unless the uk is still receiving some benefit?

 

I can see a good argument for compromising over a small payment to continue the trading agreement (as it benefits both sides), but nothing further.

2 minutes ago, transam said:

I don't take any notice of a German "convert", none....

now you have upset me?

24 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Putting aside your habitual personal insults.

 

You din’t know what the final deal is, it may for example follow the Nowegien model of EU market access, paying into the EU but with no say on EU policy.

 

So please, there is no ‘Brexit Dividend’ until the final deal is signed.

 

Neither the government nor Brexit supporters know what that deal is.

 

Allocating a ‘Brexit Dividend ‘ That does not, and may never, exist is nonsense.

I agree, which is why it's necessary for the uk to declare that it is leaving under WTO conditions once the article 50 period has elapsed.  No 'special' payment to the eu.

 

Only then will the eu start negotiating sensibly.

2 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

Yes, I for one am paying close attention to this.  Why on earth should the uk pay the eu  anything once they have left - unless the uk is still receiving some benefit?

 

I can see a good argument for compromising over a small payment to continue the trading agreement (as it benefits both sides), but nothing further.

I for one am scratching my head as to why the UK should pay anything.

 

2016 Figures.

 

EU exported £300 - 350 Billion worth of goods and services to the UK.

 

UK exported £200 - 250 Billion worth of goods and services to the EU.

 

If the EU want the UK to stump up to access and trade in the EU market, then the EU should also be stumping up to access and trade in the UK market.

 

15 minutes ago, Grouse said:

We all see the various difficulties that the EU faces. However, whereas many of us are concerned and hope for changes to avoid fracture; others express glee. Shameful in my opinion. Schadenfreude is as unwelcome as it is un-British.

"We all see the various difficulties that the EU faces. However, whereas many of us are concerned and hope for changes to avoid fracture"

 

I agree with this part.

19 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

Great graph Grouse.

 

Now how about posting another graph telling us all how a very large part of that increase was down to appointing Management and Senior Management that was not required ?

 

https://fullfact.org/news/did-nhs-spending-managers-rise-450-under-labour/

 

1 minute ago, dick dasterdly said:

I agree, which is why it's necessary for the uk to declare that it is leaving under WTO conditions once the article 50 period has elapsed.  No 'special' payment to the eu.

 

Only then will the eu start negotiating sensibly.

The PM clearly disagrees with you, perhaps she knows something you don’t.

 

But the of course there are alternatives to the PM.

 

Perhaps we should listen to Rees-Mogg, now publically discussing a 10 year interim period while privately advising clients of his hedge fund of the dangers of a ‘hard Brexit’, perhaps he too knows something you don’t.

3 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

"then there are the structured divorce payments to the EU".

 

Yes, I for one am paying close attention to this.  Why on earth should the uk pay the eu  anything once they have left - unless the uk is still receiving some benefit?

 

I can see a good argument for compromising over a small payment to continue the trading agreement (as it benefits both sides), but nothing further.

I think this is to pay for present policies and policies yet to be enacted that the UK also signed off. You can't agree as a group to pay Jack a 1,000 Euro's and then say by the way I am leaving next week so I don't have to contribute.

2 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

"We all see the various difficulties that the EU faces. However, whereas many of us are concerned and hope for changes to avoid fracture"

 

I agree with this part.

So you don't think some other posters here express schadfreude?

1 minute ago, Grouse said:

So you don't think some other posters here express schadfreude?

Schadenfreude.

14 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

Great graph Grouse.

 

Now how about posting another graph telling us all how a very large part of that increase was down to appointing Management and Senior Management that was not required ?

 

https://fullfact.org/news/did-nhs-spending-managers-rise-450-under-labour/

"Now how about posting another graph telling us all how a very large part of that increase was down to appointing Management and Senior Management that was not required ?"

 

Couldn't agree more, but I'd add the admin. staff 'necessary' to build their empire!  It's shameful the way politicians and bureaucrats increased NHS costs enormously this way.

 

Politicians should never have 'got away' with turning the NHS into yet another 'empire building' structure ☹️.

1 minute ago, dick dasterdly said:

"Now how about posting another graph telling us all how a very large part of that increase was down to appointing Management and Senior Management that was not required ?"

 

Couldn't agree more, but I'd add the admin. staff 'necessary' to build their empire!  It's shameful the way politicians and bureaucrats increased NHS costs enormously this way.

 

Politicians should never have 'got away' with turning the NHS into yet another 'empire building' structure ☹️.

It's all the EU's fault

11 minutes ago, Grouse said:

You don't take the FT? You'll be saying you don't read The Economist next!

 

Good idea to keep up with the serious press IMHO. ?

You clearly mean the press that are only concerned about the wealthy....

9 minutes ago, Grouse said:

 

I see you missed this part

 

Quote

His definition of management spending may be different from that used by the NHS Confederation, or he may be using a different dataset to make the comparison. Full Fact has contacted his office in an effort to find out more.

 

 

 

Quote

The increase in spending is therefore £852 million, or 449 per cent, as Mr Skidmore claimed. What isn't clear is why this figure diverges so sharply from the management costs given in the 2009 Health Committee report. We are currently investigating this with the Department of Health.

https://fullfact.org/news/did-nhs-spending-managers-rise-450-under-labour/

 

As anyone that has ever worked in the NHS over the last 25 years will tell you. Too many Managers, too many meetings and not enough front line nurses and doctors.

1 minute ago, dick dasterdly said:

You clearly mean the press that are only concerned about the wealthy....

They are the only ones who will win because they are pressing the buttons, all we do is notice which of the coloured lights come on.

8 minutes ago, soalbundy said:

I think this is to pay for present policies and policies yet to be enacted that the UK also signed off. You can't agree as a group to pay Jack a 1,000 Euro's and then say by the way I am leaving next week so I don't have to contribute.

Actually (IMO) , one can leave a 'club' and whilst you'll lose any money paid so far towards projects - you can't be forced into paying more once you've left.