Budget

[sinkov]

Sinkov, neither of us has any idea what the divorce bill is. So, if you think that we legally owe them zero, why on earth are we offering them £40 billion (at the moment, let's see what the figure is next week)?
Perhaps you should be part of our negotiating team
And, yes. Ministers were fairly recently saying that we should pay them zero. Then Theresa May offered them £20 billion, today it is £40 billion. Come December, who knows. They are just making fools of themselves. Or perhaps you can explain how it is all logical.

And yep, Gordon Brown made that decision on diesel cars. I am not making it up.

May has stated on numerous occasions that we will fulfiil our financial obligations, neither May nor Davis has ever said we will pay them nothing. The only question Barnier has ever asked is 'How much are you going to pay'. With respect, either you can't read, don't listen or are being deliberately disingenuous. If I am incorrect then please put up a link showing May, Davis or any of our negotiating team saying we are not paying them anything, and I will offer you a profuse apology.

There is no dispute that Brown encouraged the sale of diesel cars, but the idea that this was against all the best advice available is laughable, as I've already pointed out with the total lack of concern over diesel in the 2010 LibDem manifesto. In fact Brown didn't go as far as many others in encouraging Diesel use, when I lived in France our neighbours thought I was mad to drive a petrol engined car, diesel was around 25% cheaper at the pumps. Brown ensured that diesel was always more expensive in England. Incidentally you could do with reading that piece you linked again, parts of it are incoherent, but it also states it was mainly the civil servants advising Brown not to publish that report. It's all completely trivial nonsense anyway, if Brown had backed off on the dash for diesel the eco-loons would have been in a frenzy. As it was they got their way and thousands died.

[sinkov]

Trust, honesty and professionalism are ***** if you wish to strike a good deal with your ex-partners. This is especially true if you wish to continue to trade with them in the future. The way the EU negotiators are refusing to negotiate at all makes me cringe.

Deals simply don't get any bigger than the Brexit negotiations, but I fear that the EU elite are more concerned with their grand political project, than with the economies of the 27 remaining countries, and are seriously threatening to making a botch of it.

[1959_60]

Hi Sinkov.

Here is an article from back in March. David Jones is a senior member of the David Davis team.

https://www.politico.eu/article/uk-c...sters-believe/

In July the debate went

http://citywire.co.uk/money/uk-will-...dmits/a1033650


Our foreign secretary Boris Johnson said earlier that week the EU can ‘go whistle’ if they demand that Britain pays an exit fee in talks next week.(July)

7th August (I'll not link this because it is The Sun!) "Jacob Rees-Mogg suggested the UK should not be paying anything to the EU in order to leave"

So I have found one of our chief Brexit negotiators, our Foreign Secretary and William Rees-Mogg. Will that do or shall I find more?

Then Theresa May mentioned a figure of £20 billion.

Today that figure became £40 billion.

And yes, as is normal, Gordon Brown took advise from the civil servants before he made the diesel policy. But he saw the evidence. The civil servants suggested that it would be bad politically if he made the info public. And he agreed. If we started blaming the civil servants for bad policy then Governments would get off scot free.
This report has only recently been made public following Freedom of Information requests for the report, which proved to be very difficult to obtain.

[1959_60]

Argh!

We agreed with the EU at the outset of the talks that three things had to be settled before we could discuss future trade.

1/. Our "divorce" payment.
2/. The Irish border situation.
3/. The status of EU nationals in the UK and of UK nationals in the EU.

We simply haven't reached agreements on any of the above. So talks about future deals can't start yet.

Like I said, WE agreed to this before discussions started.

[oldcolner]

Back to the budget
I see we have taken £15bn more corporation tax this year since we reduced the rate from 28% to 20%.
Jeremy wants to put it back up!

[sinkov]

Our foreign secretary Boris Johnson said earlier that week the EU can ‘go whistle’ if they demand that Britain pays an exit fee in talks next week.(July)

Is it because you get your news from lefty rags that you're so ill-informed 59/60, or are you being disingenuous yet again ? What Boris actually said was "I think that the sums I have seen, seem to me to be extortionate and I think go whistle is an entirely appropriate expression." So far from saying we were paying nothing, he was simply saying we weren't going to pay the 100 billion euros that had been mentioned. And of course he wouldn't be saying we were paying nothing because that has never been our position, what he was referring to was the amount we would actually agree to pay. Are you not aware of what he actually said ? Did the Grauniad take it out of context ? Surely not.

May 3rd, David Davis on the BBC website, "We will not be paying 100 billion, we will do it properly, we will take our responsibilities seriously". Once again, no mention of not paying anything, the only point of dispute being how much we agree to pay, which has been our official position all along.

September 22nd, Theresa May, "The UK will honour commitments we have made during our period of membership" This has always been our position, she has re-iterated it on numerous occasions, I'm astounded you are unaware of it, how can you not be, where do you get your information from. Don't bother answering that, I think I know.

That official you mention, he was pointing out the legal situation to a committee of MPs, which is that we don't have a legal obligation to pay them anything, he wasn't stating our official position. Dear god, do I have to point this out to you, did you not read the article ?

Rees Mogg can say what he likes, have any view he likes, I happen to agree with him, but it's irrelevant, that is not our official position, never has been. If it was then you would easily be able to find quotes by May and/or Davies stating that we were paying them nothing. So where are they ?

[1959_60]

Morning Sinkov!

Budget day today so we better be on top form

What I originally stated was that "Ministers" were suggesting fairly recently that we should pay zero. And i stand by that comment.

And what about this £20 billion/£40 billion nonsense?

It doesn't really matter now, does it? We are going to be paying a huge sum - that is obvious. And my original point was that we have now committed to this amount of money which Philip Hammond will have to budget for. Unless he attempts to kick the can further down the road and forgets about it until we actually leave in 2019.

[Altobelli]

with the usual speech along the lines of We are striving forward to be great again, THEY ARE FULL OF SH!T.

"Building a Britain for the future" he says, I wasn't far off was I ?

[The Bedlington Terrier]

"Building a Britain for the future" he says, I wasn't far off was I ?

The Tories chickened. Balls of steel that guy Hammond...

Attachment 7259

[sinkov]

He cracked some jokes, he moved a bit on Universal Credit, he promised a bit more for the NHS, abolished stamp duty, didn't try to clatter diesel drivers because they believed the green crap, and left the duty on fuel, beer and wine alone. Nothing to get excited about, but not the total disaster I was expecting, although I haven't seen the media reaction yet, might be some disaster lurking in there that I've missed.
I hope Jezza's OK, he seemed a bit overwrought at times during his reply.