Britain cannot be blackmailed by EU over exit bill: minister

[Khun Han]

Just now, sirineou said:

It is not the EU that is asking them to leave, It is the EK who wants to leave , the onus is on them

I am sure the UK must have their own records of agreement they signed in. All they need to do is provide a number they think is correct and provide collaborating evidence supported by pertinent documents. 

If the EU disagrees, then  the onus is on them to support their position.

Personally I believe the EU is correct , because if the were not the UK will be following the above procedure and rubbing their face in it, but they are not. so they engage in acrimony to cover their own  incompetence and/or political aspirations..

 

 

 

Your world is upside down. The UK is not demanding to pay an exit bill. The EU is demanding that we pay one. Therefore, the onus is clearly on the EU to quantify what they think we owe, and not the other way round.

[aright]

sirineou.......I would not accuse the EU of trying to Blackmail the UK but I would accuse them of being disingenuous.

They presented a leaving Bill to the UK as a fait accompli.

As Rees-Mogg says if the shoe was on the other foot and a country who was a net recipient of EU funds decided to leave would the EU say we should agree how much we should pay this country before we can discuss anything else, as its opening statement.  I think not

[sirineou]

2 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

Your world is upside down. The UK is not demanding to pay an exit bill. The EU is demanding that we pay one. Therefore, the onus is clearly on the EU to quantify what they think we owe, and not the other way round.

I am sure the UK must have known there would be  settlement when they left, and before they decided to leave  they must have known what the bill was based on their records . it would be incompetent to  do otherwise IMO

All they need to do is provide their reasoning why they disagree with the number..  They are not that stupid, they know that,, and the fact they are not doing it tells me they got squat, Just ass covering acrimony 

Don;t buy it , hold them to task.

[Khun Han]

6 minutes ago, sirineou said:

I am sure the UK must have known there would be  settlement when they left, and before they decided to leave  they must have known what the bill was based on their records . it would be incompetent to  do otherwise IMO

All they need to do is provide their reasoning why they disagree with the number..  They are not that stupid, they know that,, and the fact they are not doing it tells me they got squat, Just ass covering acrimony 

Don;t buy it , hold them to task.

 

It's quite obvious that your upside down thinking is based on antagonism toward the UK. Come back when you are feeling more logical.

[sirineou]

5 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

It's quite obvious that your upside down thinking is based on antagonism toward the UK. Come back when you are feeling more logical.

First of all let me say that I am enjoying this conversation we are having except the part concerning my logic . 

Is your position" come on be reasonable see it my way"  

My logic is not always correct but I would appreciate it to instead of asking me to leave the party to show me how I am wrong.

I have no antagonism toward the UK  very nice people , many of them good friends of mine. some family members.

[chang50]

32 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

It's quite obvious that your upside down thinking is based on antagonism toward the UK. Come back when you are feeling more logical.

 I was born and raised in the UK and lived there for 51 years and have no antagonism towards the old country YET I fully support the argument you have rudely dismissed as 'upside down thinking'.Doubtless this is because I fail to meet your arbitrary standard of logicality.

[Khun Han]

14 minutes ago, sirineou said:

First of all let me say that I am enjoying this conversation we are having except the part concerning my logic . 

Is your position" come on be reasonable see it my way"  

My logic is not always correct but I would appreciate it to instead of asking me to leave the party to show me how I am wrong.

I have no antagonism toward the UK  very nice people , many of them good friends of mine. some family members.

 

You first suggested that the EU will produce an itemized bill. It's been pointed out to you that they won't. You're now suggesting that the UK should itemize why the amount the EU is asking for is wrong. The EU won't even give a specific figure for the UK to split down. You keep suggesting that the onus is on the UK to quantify the exit bill. The UK is not demanding to pay an exit bill, so there is no onus whatsoever on the UK to come up with a figure.

 

The only side with diddly squat is the EU. They can't quantify the exit bill because the actual nett amount owed is very little. So they are holding out for a negotiation over a generous, over-the-odds offer from the UK.

[Khun Han]

7 minutes ago, chang50 said:

 I was born and raised in the UK and lived there for 51 years and have no antagonism towards the old country YET I fully support the argument you have rudely dismissed as 'upside down thinking'.Doubtless this is because I fail to meet your arbitrary standard of logicality.

 

If an entity demands money, the onus is on that entity to quantify and justify the amount. To suggest otherwise is upside down thinking.

[chang50]

1 minute ago, Khun Han said:

 

If an entity demands money, the onus is on that entity to quantify and justify the amount. To suggest otherwise is upside down thinking.

I'm only interested in the best deal we can get after the utterly disastrous vote to leave (a great example of upside down thinking by the way).If that means negotiating and compromising for a better future so be it.

[Khun Han]

3 minutes ago, chang50 said:

I'm only interested in the best deal we can get after the utterly disastrous vote to leave (a great example of upside down thinking by the way).If that means negotiating and compromising for a better future so be it.

 

The vote to leave was a great example of forward thinking.

[sirineou]

7 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

You first suggested that the EU will produce an itemized bill. It's been pointed out to you that they won't. You're now suggesting that the UK should itemize why the amount the EU is asking for is wrong. The EU won't even give a specific figure for the UK to split down. You keep suggesting that the onus is on the UK to quantify the exit bill. The UK is not demanding to pay an exit bill, so there is no onus whatsoever on the UK to come up with a figure.

 

The only side with diddly squat is the EU. They can't quantify the exit bill because the actual nett amount owed is very little. So they are holding out for a negotiation over a generous, over-the-odds offer from the UK.

I thought you and others were asserting that the EU was asking for an unreasonable amount, now we are asserting that  they are not even asking for a specific amount but what ever that amount , it is wrong

I am confused.

If the EU does not provide a specific amount owed then  it is obvious that the UK can not pay it  and should enter into negotiations of what they owe .  Bur if I understand this correctly , the UK does not want to do this but wants to negotiate future relationships. 

"I know I owe you money but I will not give it to you or even agree what I owe you unless you agree to be nice toe in the future"  isn't that also a blackmail??

[sirineou]

PS:

Thank you all for engaging me in this conversation, I enjoy being challenged 

Many replys worth answering but unfortunately no time to answer then all. I hope it will not be viewed as disrespect

In six hrs I am leaving the US for a week in the Greek islands and then to Thailand where we will start the build of a retirement home to use when i retire in a couple of years, fortunately the wife is packing bags.

I am disappointed that I could not find a Borat bathing suit for Greece

and will have to use my traditional American bathing  suit

Talk with you when I get there

Cheers

[stag4]

18 minutes ago, chang50 said:

I'm only interested in the best deal we can get after the utterly disastrous vote to leave (a great example of upside down thinking by the way).If that means negotiating and compromising for a better future so be it.

Only interested in the exchange rate and how it affects your pension more like!

The referendum was democracy in action and why you think a country taking back control of its own affairs is disastrous seems like upside down thinking to me.

Britain will go on to prosper when it is unshackled from the restraints of the stagnant EU economy and by the way Article 50 does not state any requirement for a so called divorce payment 

[aright]

I have certainly enjoyed your contribution. I wish you and your wife/partner  a great life in LOS.

What Part of Thailand have you chosen to live in?

[sirineou]

 

10 minutes ago, aright said:

I have certainly enjoyed your contribution. I wish you and your wife/partner  a great life in LOS.

What Part of Thailand have you chosen to live in?

My wife is from Khon Kaen where we have a small place we helped her sister build  we will be building in property next to her sisters where we own additional land , that way she can keep an eye on the house when we are traveling.

it is just outside the ring road on the University side. Country enough for quiet and gardens, but 15 minutes to city conveniences.

I am excited to be coming back I have being missing Thailand very much!!

Edited September 3, 2017 by sirineou

[aright]

Once again good luck. When you are finally settled and  I am in Khon Kaen beers might be in order.

I would be interested in your observations of life in Greece....they really are the poor man of Europe

[chang50]

13 minutes ago, stag4 said:

Only interested in the exchange rate and how it affects your pension more like!

The referendum was democracy in action and why you think a country taking back control of its own affairs is disastrous seems like upside down thinking to me.

Britain will go on to prosper when it is unshackled from the restraints of the stagnant EU economy and by the way Article 50 does not state any requirement for a so called divorce payment 

Well excuse me for wanting a decent standard of living for my retired years which I worked long and hard for...and for also believing what will benefit me will be good for the UK.

[elliss]

On 9/1/2017 at 10:07 AM, canopus1969 said:

Tell Johnny foreigner to sling his 'ook  

     Would that  include foreigners/aliens residing  in Thailand ?.  OMG .

[stag4]

10 minutes ago, chang50 said:

Well excuse me for wanting a decent standard of living for my retired years which I worked long and hard for...and for also believing what will benefit me will be good for the UK.

Well you need to accept the democratic decision of the British people who mainly have no interest in the temporary affect on your overseas pension.

British businesses seem to favour the drop in the pound though, likewise the stock markets.

so quit with the "Only interested in the best deal for Britain" BS.

[Khun Han]

56 minutes ago, sirineou said:

I thought you and others were asserting that the EU was asking for an unreasonable amount, now we are asserting that  they are not even asking for a specific amount but what ever that amount , it is wrong

I am confused.

If the EU does not provide a specific amount owed then  it is obvious that the UK can not pay it  and should enter into negotiations of what they owe .  Bur if I understand this correctly , the UK does not want to do this but wants to negotiate future relationships. 

"I know I owe you money but I will not give it to you or even agree what I owe you unless you agree to be nice toe in the future"  isn't that also a blackmail??

 

Various EU officials have bandied about various unreasonable amounts, but their negotiating team won't put a figure on the table.

[sirineou]

4 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

Various EU officials have bandied about various unreasonable amounts, but their negotiating team won't put a figure on the table.

Politicians will do what politicians  do.

We must keep our eye on the ball 

Remember what your football coach use to tell you?

"don't look at their feet , keep your eye on the ball"

This goes both ways EU and UK

Edited September 3, 2017 by sirineou

[chang50]

1 hour ago, stag4 said:

Well you need to accept the democratic decision of the British people who mainly have no interest in the temporary affect on your overseas pension.

British businesses seem to favour the drop in the pound though, likewise the stock markets.

so quit with the "Only interested in the best deal for Britain" BS.

Like the 1975 decision was respected?And why can't my personal interests coincide with the country's?Sounds like you're the one peddling BS.

[Grouse]

3 hours ago, stag4 said:

Only interested in the exchange rate and how it affects your pension more like!

The referendum was democracy in action and why you think a country taking back control of its own affairs is disastrous seems like upside down thinking to me.

Britain will go on to prosper when it is unshackled from the restraints of the stagnant EU economy and by the way Article 50 does not state any requirement for a so called divorce payment 

Baldwin said "democracy can only survive as a system if it is constructive in character. A political system is not good just because the principles behind it are good. It is only good if it resolves the political and economic problems with which the nation that uses it is facing".

 

Brexit is such a glaringly disastrous move, as clearly recognised by the vast majority of Parliamentarians, that one sometimes doubts the superiority of democracy generally and universal suffrage in particular. 

[Khun Han]

1 hour ago, chang50 said:

Like the 1975 decision was respected?And why can't my personal interests coincide with the country's?Sounds like you're the one peddling BS.

 

The 1975 decision was (retrospectively) to enter a European trading group. The 2016 decision was to leave a political union that wasn't voted for in 1975. An absolutely sound decision by the majority of people who voted in the huge turnout.

[aright]

46 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Baldwin said "democracy can only survive as a system if it is constructive in character. A political system is not good just because the principles behind it are good. It is only good if it resolves the political and economic problems with which the nation that uses it is facing".

 

Brexit is such a glaringly disastrous move, as clearly recognised by the vast majority of Parliamentarians, that one sometimes doubts the superiority of democracy generally and universal suffrage in particular. 

 

People can cry much easier than they can change.

              _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

 

Not everything that is faced can be changed, but nothing can be changed until it is faced 

              _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _              

 

Baldwin.

 

Oh sorry!!  Stupid me!! That was James Baldwin.   However on reflection it does seem apt.

 

What country do you plan on moving to?

 

 

[chang50]

37 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

The 1975 decision was (retrospectively) to enter a European trading group. The 2016 decision was to leave a political union that wasn't voted for in 1975. An absolutely sound decision by the majority of people who voted in the huge turnout.

No it wasn't at all as a quick google search would have shown you.It was to guage support for our CONTINUED membership of the EC.You cannot retrospectively enter a group you fully joined 2 plus years earlier.67% were in favour not a measly 52%.

This info. was taken directly from the Wiki page on the referendum.I encourage you to read it.

I voted and remember it well although I never thought my vote would eventually be disregarded.

[Khun Han]

The beeb leads another article with the EU pov. But read further down to get the lowdown from David Davis' incisive overview:

 

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41140564

[Khun Han]

37 minutes ago, chang50 said:

No it wasn't at all as a quick google search would have shown you.It was to guage support for our CONTINUED membership of the EC.You cannot retrospectively enter a group you fully joined 2 plus years earlier.67% were in favour not a measly 52%.

This info. was taken directly from the Wiki page on the referendum.I encourage you to read it.

I voted and remember it well although I never thought my vote would eventually be disregarded.

 

Ted Heath admitted that he lied about the nature of our membership of the European Economic Community. And he took us in illegally, without the referendum that was required if he'd told the truth about the loss of sovereignty involved. The following Wilson government knew this, so it held a retrospective referendum, which still failed abjectly to address the sovereignty issue. Finally, in 2016, the public was allowed to vote on the sovereignty issue, having seen the steady erosion of sovereignty as the EEC evolved into the political union of the EU. Surprise surprise.....despite an onslaught of propaganda and threats from remain's Project Fear, the majority voted to grab back sovereignty, in a huge turnout.

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, aright said:

 

People can cry much easier than they can change.

              _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

 

Not everything that is faced can be changed, but nothing can be changed until it is faced 

              _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _              

 

Baldwin.

 

Oh sorry!!  Stupid me!! That was James Baldwin.   However on reflection it does seem apt.

 

What country do you plan on moving to?

 

 

Actually, you find me in the French Pyrenees!

 

I have no plans to leave Thailand right now but I have acquired a place in Edinburgh and I have applied for Danish citizenship.

[aright]

19 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

despite an onslaught of propaganda and threats from remain's Project Fear, the majority voted to grab back sovereignty, in a huge turnout.

and quite rightly so.

This week Parliament will begin debating the European Union Withdrawal Bill which does not include debating the pros and cons of leaving, which might surprise some members of this forum because that was decided in last years referendum, nor will it debate what the UK will be like when we leave the UK ,that's the Job of David Davis and his team. The Bill will concern itself with  ensuring the UK has a functioning legal system upon exit , that we will leave the EU in  a managed  and efficient way and upon exit we are able to meet our international obligations. Some Parliamentarians and members of this forum will try to hinder this Bill which is in the national interest and the will of the people. Shame on them!

The Bill repeals the European Communities Act 1972. and converts all EU Law into UK Law. It also gives Parliament the right to change these laws when we are outside the EU.

For years we have been lectured that EU legislation has a minimal effect on our way of life. According to the EU's own database there are 12000 EU regulations in force that we didn't vote for.  

Say no more! nudge, nudge, wink wink