UK would still have to pay its EU budget bill - Moscovici

[Forethat]

4 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Really? At least we can finally localize the source of your misrepresentation.  This articles refers to obligations such as outstanding obligations including loans and pensions incurred before the agreement was expected to take effect. In other words, financial instruments dating from before Brexit the actual date of Brexit.

Here's the text:

"On 31 March of each year, starting in 2021, until their amortisation, expiry or termination, for each financial instrument referred to in paragraph 1, the Union shall communicate to the United Kingdom the available information regarding the financial operations referred to in paragraph 1 that have been decided upon or approved before the date of entry into force of this Agreement and those that have been decided upon or approved on or after that date. "

 

You would be well advised to consult this reasonably detailed explanation of an agreement that you have so abysmally misrepresented.

https://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-18-6422_en.htm

 

 

Y

Ehh...no. 

"those that have been decided upon or approved on or after that date"

 

After that date. That's what the proposed agreement says. Nothing else.

 

I am right and you are wrong. There's really no point debating this.

Bye.

[bristolboy]

1 minute ago, Forethat said:

Ehh...no. 

"those that have been decided upon or approved on or after that date"

 

After that date. That's what the proposed agreement says. Nothing else.

 

I am right and you are wrong. There's really no point debating this.

Bye.

Nonsense. When you finance obligations such as pensions some financial instruments expire and have to be replaced by others. This is all about the financing of obligations that are in place up to the date of Brexit. Article 1 makes that clear:

 From the date of entry into force of this Agreement until the full amortisation of the financial operations referred to in point (a) of this subparagraph, the Union shall identify the financial operations that: (a) before the date of entry into force of this Agreement, have been decided upon by the European Commission and, where necessary, approved by the financial institutions which have been entrusted by the European Commission with the implementation of a financial instrument under a programme of the MFF 2014-2020 or under earlier financial perspectives under direct or indirect implementation; and (b) have been decided upon and, where necessary, approved on or after the date of entry into force of this Agreement.

[stephenterry]

4 hours ago, Krataiboy said:

Agreed. By the same token, if Parliament had a shred of morality, it would not be seeking to overturn Cameron's self-declared "binding" agreement to leave the EU.

 

(Now wait for all the Remainers to pile in with their lame excuses why this is not happening).

it's their democratic right - something you don't understand or accept.

[stephenterry]

2 hours ago, Forethat said:

I think it's a perfectly valid analogy as the proposed withdrawal agreement has a clause where the matter is covered:

EU reserve the right to hold the UK financially liable for expenses they might accrue AFTER the UK have left the EU. They have even given us the annual date when they'll send us the bar bill.  (Article 144 Paragraph 2):

The withdrawal agreement states in clear text that the UK are financially liable for financial operations approved AFTER we've left.

 

You really don't have a clue, do you?

Cute.

 

One thing I agree with, as I have already posted the facts. Still need your acceptance that the UK is a sovereign nation - something that you refuse to admit. Which probably doesn't add to your credibility or your posts on this forum.   

[3NUMBAS]

the gravey train stops on oct31. no more over generosity to these mafia running the giant ponzi scheme..italy will be in trouble without the free cash and greece too

[3NUMBAS]

2 hours ago, JonnyF said:

That's a huge IF. But IF that happened then the UK would pay.

 

Far more likely is the court decides on the UK side, reduces the 39 Billion to single digit Billions and the EU go sulking and refuse to discuss a trade deal for a couple of years.

wile their exports remain in the sheds and the EU crumbles

[stephenterry]

58 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

1. I don't see any mistake. The mistake was staying this long, we're getting out just in time.

2. We are Leaving not quitting.

3. The fact that the EU is trying to extort 39 Billion from us because we are leaving is not a failing of the UK but an increasing typical vindictive reaction from a failing protectionist racket that is becoming desperate for cash to fill the gap that UK contributions will leave.

 

They don't decide how much we pay them any more than a husband decides how much his wife needs to pay him before she can leave the family home. If an agreement cannot be reached between BOTH parties then the courts can settle it. I'm happy with that.

Get real. Read the facts before commenting rubbish.

[puipuitom]

15 hours ago, luckyluke said:

How to get 7-9 billions from the U.K.? 

One ask initially 30-40 billions. 

Very simple: levy import duty when imported UK goods into the EU. UK export a 285 Bn pounds, an average of 5 % = in two years this money is in ( despite quite some products will be out-of-competition seen import duty into the EU, like petrol products, confectionary, all animal-products ), 

[3NUMBAS]

Really. Someone who's standing up for the UK's democracy against a failing EU cabal of self serving unelected Euocrats, who want us to keep contributing obscene amounts of billions, to their failing united states of Europe to keep them and Germany (now in recession) Italy (also in recession) Greece - in hock to Germany and cannot pay back it's loans.

[puipuitom]

11 hours ago, Forethat said:

...only to realise that after you left they invited their friends and ordered a dozen cases of vintage champagne to go with the caviar.

So, therefore… every member state has the PM in the EU Council, a commissioner in the EU Commission and MP's in the EU Parliament.

[puipuitom]

8 hours ago, JonnyF said:

EU Economics Commissioner sides with the EU in debate over EU economics. I'm shocked.

 

I say we let this go to international arbitration. As terryw said, the UK could well have a legitimate claim to a lot of EU assets that it helped fund over the years. 39 Billion is just an arbitrary number that Remainer May and Barnier dreamt up over dinner a couple of years ago and bears no relation to reality i.e. the amount legally owed in either direction.

 

We've seen that the EU is incapable of sensible negotiation so let the courts decide.

Maybe you Brexiteers finally could start to get yourself informed ? There is enough published on Internet.

The EU divorce bill | The Institute for Government

https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk › explainers

28 mrt. 2018 - The divorce bill is the amount we have agreed to pay in settlement of ... at the time, UK officials estimated a potential bill of £35–39 billion (bn).

The EU "divorce bill" - Full Fact

https://fullfact.org › europe › eu-divorce-bill

Claim: The EU is asking for a 100 billion Brexit divorce bill.

[Forethat]

6 minutes ago, puipuitom said:

So, therefore… every member state has the PM in the EU Council, a commissioner in the EU Commission and MP's in the EU Parliament.

Except for the UK PM who's been kicked out according to the proposed withdrawal agreement...but now has to abide by whatever BS comes out of named institutions?

Great.

[bristolboy]

12 minutes ago, Forethat said:

Except for the UK PM who's been kicked out according to the proposed withdrawal agreement...but now has to abide by whatever BS comes out of named institutions?

Great.

Brexit is about being kicked out, not leaving?

[Baerboxer]

16 hours ago, Thongkorn said:

The UK does not have to pay One Euro . or one pound 

 

Morally, ethically and professionally the UK should pay what it is legal obliged to pay.

 

However, that figure must be fully audited, itemized in detail, and be legally due.

 

Also, the EU must detail exactly how they will apportion and give the UK it's share of EU assets that it's legally entitled to.

 

The bullying Barnier and his threats of "pay up whatever we say with no questions or else no trade deal talks" won't work any more.

[Krataiboy]

3 hours ago, stephenterry said:

it's their democratic right - something you don't understand or accept.

 

The issue is here is not "rights", but morality - clearlly a concept YOU don't understand.

[Krataiboy]

4 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Your point being that others hold and express different views to your own

 

I guess it evaded you, this is a discussion forum.

You have, characteristically, missed my point, which is that Remainers in the context of the Cameron pledge,  seem incapable of distinguishing what may be lawful from what is moral.

 

 

Edited August 28, 2019 by Krataiboy

[puipuitom]

3 hours ago, Forethat said:

Except for the UK PM who's been kicked out according to the proposed withdrawal agreement...but now has to abide by whatever BS comes out of named institutions?

Great.

The British PM is NOT in any negotiations / discussions etc for the EU situations AFTER Brexit. And of course all what concerns the EU attitude towards the Brexit negociations. For every other meeting, then May, now Boris is still in.

[stephenterry]

12 hours ago, Krataiboy said:

 

The issue is here is not "rights", but morality - clearlly a concept YOU don't understand.

Go and complain to your MP, then. Nothing to do with me. I'm not able to make a decision on what's best for Britain, I can only lobby against a no-deal.