The same information has been circulating in our media up here, what with GB being one of this country’s biggest trading partners.
What with negotiations that could drag on for a couple of years, my guess is that government ministries and financial centers across Europe are going to be laying in extra stocks of antacids to quell those nervous stomachs.
When we blindly adopt a religion, a political system, a literary dogma, we become automatons. We cease to grow. - Anais Nin
Anders and his men served under Montgomery and then Alexander in Italy. As for the Muscovites you mean those Poles who did not get shot at Katyn like my great Grandfather and one of his Brothers? No. But there is a difference between wanting to fight for the liberation of your country (as the Poles who came west did) and those forced to fight or be shot by the NKVD. We remember our friends and our enemies and while I hold no man or Lady responsible for the sins of their ancestor when I see the same Checkist state re-establishing itself and invading the country where my family home now lies I regard my duty as clear. I would only urge you that this not just a Muscovite - Ukraine war but far broader. I was not the first to understand it but have followed the intricacies in depth at all levels since 2008 when the Georgian assault started confirming my fears (and when I joined this forum).
Last edited by snapper; 30 Mar 17, at 23:42.
How do you think that goes down in the UK?
It's a huge amount of money for the UK (half of our health budget), its penny's for the EU.
It's in the EU's interest to be kind to Britain. We understand that the deal has to be inferior to membership, but to those of us trying to defend the EU it makes our job much harder.
Just let us go, dont try to extract a price.. it helps nobody
Last edited by zara; 31 Mar 17, at 01:21.
The European Parliament will pass this resolution next wednesday with an overwhelming majority. This press release is a bit more legible as to its contents - basically, no withdrawal agreement will be passed until the UK acknowledges that it'll pay up. Among other demands - such as no signing any trade pacts before leaving. And that withdrawal agreement has to be drafted and made ready for passing "well ahead" of the May 2019 EP election, meaning not during that year. Otherwise full fall-back to third-nation status on March 30th 2019 plus sanctions.
So what if the entire EU falls apart? Is it that bad a thing to have a bunch of independent countries on good trading terms with each other and nothing else?
I feel like there's something I'm missing here, explain.
The best part of repentance is the sin
You do remember the 1933 Western Australia secession vote that garnered far more support than Brexit did? It's that kinda thing.
The fact that your comparing the attempted secession of a state from the country it was part of as the same as a country wishing to leave the EU shows your arrogance on the matter.
The EU isn't a sovereign nation, Brexit is in no way similar to the WA secession vote.
The best part of repentance is the sin
Eh, my father was living in Kalgoorlie half a century ago. They saw the matter rather differently back then.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/frances.../#49d831c94514The European Union Lays Out A Greek Trap For The United Kingdom
Frances Coppola ,
Following the UK’s formal resignation on Wednesday March 29th 2017, the European Union has now laid out its approach to negotiating the United Kingdom’s exit from the bloc. At first glance, the draft negotiation guidelines appear friendly and reasonable. But don’t be fooled. They contain a trap with which followers of the Greek bailout negotiations should be all too familiar.
At this point, Brexit supporters will no doubt scream “The UK is not like Greece!”. Of course it isn’t. It is one of the largest economies in Europe, and its departure will leave a gaping wound in the EU which will take some time to heal. A smooth, orderly exit is in everyone’s interests, to minimize damage on both sides and promote healing. And this is what both the UK and the EU say they want. So why do I say there is a trap?
The essence of the Greek negotiations is that the debt relief that Greece so desperately needs is conditional on Greece meeting all the EU creditors’ conditions, in full. The EU will not even discuss debt relief until sufficient progress has been made on everything else. Every time Greece draws nearer to debt relief it is snatched away, either by adding new conditions or by finding reasons to doubt that conditions have really been met.
Of course, the UK is not looking for debt relief. It is after another prize. Theresa May’s letter outlined what the UK wants (my emphasis):
Agreeing a high-level approach to the issues arising from our withdrawal will of course be an early priority. But we also propose a bold and ambitious Free Trade Agreement between the United Kingdom and the European Union. This should be of greater scope and ambition than any such agreement before it so that it covers sectors crucial to our linked economies such as financial services and network industries.
Wonderful. Not only does the UK want a free trade agreement to be agreed before it leaves the bloc, it apparently wants that agreement to give it better terms than any trade agreement the EU has with any other country. I don’t know who constructed this flight of fancy, but it has about as much chance of seeing the light of day as a bottom-feeder in the Marianas Trench.
The EU promptly stamped on any idea the UK's Brexit team might have that the UK can have the sort of trade access it currently enjoys as a single market member:
A non-member of the Union, that does not live up to the same obligations as a member, cannot have the same rights and enjoy the same benefits as a member.
Whatever trade agreement the UK ends up with is not going to come close to what it currently has as an EU member.
Unfortunately, the UK really does need a new trade agreement. It needs it much more than the EU does. The UK stands to lose far more than the EU from trading on WTO terms after Brexit. Currently around 44% of the UK’s exports go to the EU, and over half of its imports come from there. Its crucial automobile manufacturing and financial services industries stand to be particularly badly hurt.
The EU knows this perfectly well, not least because Mrs. May’s letter said so. Honestly, who writes these things?
Draft Guidelines from the European Commission. Some highlights:
- "A non-member of the Union, that does not live up to the same obligations as a member, cannot have the same rights and enjoy the same benefits as a member."
- "In accordance with the principle that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed, individual items cannot be settled separately."
- "there will be no separate negotiations between individual Member States and the United Kingdom on matters pertaining to the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the Union."
- "an agreement on a future relationship between the Union and the United Kingdom as such can only be concluded once the United Kingdom has become a third country."
- "A single financial settlement should ensure that the Union and the United Kingdom both respect the obligations undertaken before the date of withdrawal. The settlement should cover all legal and budgetary commitments as well as liabilities, including contingent liabilities."
- "The European Council expects the United Kingdom to honour its share of international commitments contracted in the context of its EU membership."
They're also raising the question of both Gibraltar and Akrotiri btw. Which kinda has the British press in a tiff right now.
MAPPED: The REAL winners and losers from the EU (and surprise - Britain gets a raw deal)
BRITAIN has coughed up an eye-watering 32 BILLION euros in net contributions to European Union coffers in the last five years, official figures show.
the shocking sum – which converts to £25 BILLION - reveals that the UK contributes nearly one fifth of the EU's overall net budget even after receiving a rebate on our bill from Brussels negotiated by Margaret Thatcher.
The sum is roughly equal to half UK defence budget, almost a quarter of the annual NHS bill, and a little under half Britain’s welfare budget.
Just three EU member states - Britain, France and Germany - account for an astonishing two-thirds of the entire net income of the EU, with only 10 of the 28 paying in more than they take out.
Poland is by far the biggest recipient of EU cash, syphoning off a jaw-dropping 57.3 billion euros from Brussels coffers over a five-year period.
Our map lays bare the seemingly unstoppable flow of wealth from West to East and highlights the vast inequality at the heart of how the EU's astonishing largesse is paid for.
Between 2010 and 2014 taxpayers in Britain, France and Germany ploughed net contributions of 127.5 billion euros into the Brussels project, according to official figures from the European Commission.
But during the same time the Eastern European members of the club - some 10 former Communist countries - took out 134.5 billion euros in funding and subsidies.
The figures mean that German taxpayers effectively cough up to fund the lifestyles of people in neighbouring Poland, while Britain's contribution is equivalent to what Spain and Portugal take out.
And in reality our contribution could be much higher, because European Union statisticians include grants provided to private companies when calculating what each member state's net contribution to the budget is.
Britain's Office for National Statistics (ONS), has calculated the UK's net contribution figure for 2015 at some £9.9 billion (12.7bn euros), meaning we are the second largest contributor behind only Germany.
Economist Mark Baimbridge, a senior lecturer at Bradford University, said: "The EU budget is structured so that the UK consistently contributes a greater proportion of finances than it receives in return, or than is warranted by national income.
"The four revenue mechanisms were biased against members, like the UK, whose historically higher-than-average consumption rates caused overpayment to the EU in comparison to the GDP per capita calculation."
Justice Secretary Michael Gove has also raised fears that in future Britain's rebate - currently worth around four billion euros a year - could be "eroded" by other member states, many of which like to see it scrapped.
The cut in our bill, secured by Mrs Thatcher in the 1980s to address the unfair proportion of the Brussels bill Britain was expected to foot, is not written into EU constitutions but it does require the unanimous agreement of all 28 states including the UK to alter it.
However there has been one previous alteration to the rebate in 2005, when then Prime Minister Tony Blair agreed to give away 40 per cent of it in return for a pledge by Brussels bureaucrats to reform the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), which they swiftly reneged on.
Last edited by Toby; 31 Mar 17, at 17:33.
German critical commentary by conservatives likes to highlight contributions compared to GDP instead. In this the Netherlands are the highest net contributor (0.54% of their GDP flow to the EU) followed by Sweden (0.48%) and then Germany and the UK (equal at 0.46%). The highest beneficiaries are Bulgaria (5.33% of GDP provided by the EU) and Greece (2.8%). Of course such small and - in the case of paying members - less differentiated numbers aren't as "sensational".
Regardless, As I said Kato I was talking in terms of actual amounts of money not per head of population, The UK pays more because ( or even regardless of) it has a higher population, BUT asks for less back, which makes it a NET contributor. To an organisation that CAN'T sign its accounts off>>>>Without certain mysterious anomalies still being Present..I seem to remember Two EU administors being sacked (without reason) that questioned this publically!
There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)