The European Commission didn't seem to think at first that the so-called "Brexit bill" would be much of an issue. Britain's outstanding debt would be calculated "scientifically", Jean-Claude Juncker said in March, then airily predicting that the final bill would be "around" £50 billion.
Oddly enough, the British are not inclined to hand over their chequebook to the Commission president to fill out as he wishes...
EU leaders won't get more money out of Britain by throwing their toys out of the pram
Asa Bennett
29 August 2017
The Telegraph
361 Comments
European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker talks with Michel Barnier, EU's chief Brexit negotiator Credit: Xinhua/Barcroft Images
The European Commission didn't seem to think at first that the so-called "Brexit bill" would be much of an issue. Britain's outstanding debt would be calculated "scientifically", Jean-Claude Juncker said in March, then airily predicting that the final bill would be "around" £50 billion.
Oddly enough, the British are not inclined to hand over their chequebook to the Commission president to fill out as he wishes. They're happy to pay £36 billion, on the proviso that both sides can start on a free trade deal sooner, but that offer falls foul of Brussels' beloved schedule for how these talks should go.
Some European heads of state - like Ireland's Taoiseach, Leo Varadkar - feel that it is "common sense" to not separate such issues, but they have had to give way to the Commission's line - trotted out by Monsieur Juncker this week - that "we settle the past before we look forward to the future".
The bill is part of that "past" Brussels wants to settle, and they have been doing their best to make sure Britain doesn't question the sums they're demanding. Michel Barnier insisted in May that the bill should be "incontestable", and threatened "explosive" consequences if Britain tries to wriggle out of it. The British have since been contesting it, with the "explosive" consequence that Eurocrats are now throwing a collective sulk.
Jean-Claude Juncker led the charge this week in a huffy speech to EU ambassadors, dismissing every paper the British government has put forward – "none of those is satisfactory" – and insisting that "there are an enormous amount of issues that need to be settled". Monsieur Barnier backed him up yesterday with a lecture on why the British need to take negotiations "seriously".
Such a rebuke is typical from the Frenchman, who likes to pose as the elder statesman in these talks. But that doesn't stop him from making puerile gestures, as he did in a piece for Le Monde this week warning that Britain would be less safe after Brexit.
Where to begin with this scaremongering? He has conveniently forgotten about Nato, and the Five Eyes Agreement - neither of which end after Britain leaves the European Union. “Internal security, protecting our external borders and managing crises in our neighborhood are at the heart of our priorities,” Monsieur Barnier intoned. Yet why would he pretend that European security forces would end co-operation with their British counterparts when the continent is still under threat from Isil, and is struggling to find a lasting solution to the migration crisis?
The bloc's chief negotiator knows that co-operation on security and defence would be maintained on a bilateral basis, but he can't resist a melodramatic statement if it might allow him to scare Britain into falling into line.
The increasing stridency in rhetoric from EU officials shows how irked they are about Britain sticking to its guns. If the bloc wants Britain to pay as much as £90 billion as an exit bill, it is up to them to explain why it sees it as appropriate. But accountability is anathema to Brussels, so its negotiators are doing all they can to avoid justifying themselves. Instead, its leading lights are trying to get Britain to agree through their preferred tactics of threats and bullying.
The British have already made clear, in the words of Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, that "we are bill-paying people" who will meet their "legal obligations". Negotiators will set out orally to their counterparts the legal analysis on what they see as their financial commitments. If the EU wants to get more out of Britain before it goes, it should stop throwing its toys out of the pram and pay attention. Open dialogue, rather than petulance, is what both sides need.
EU leaders won't get more money out of Britain by throwing their toys out of the pram
Oddly enough, the British are not inclined to hand over their chequebook to the Commission president to fill out as he wishes...
EU leaders won't get more money out of Britain by throwing their toys out of the pram
Asa Bennett
29 August 2017
The Telegraph
361 Comments
European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker talks with Michel Barnier, EU's chief Brexit negotiator Credit: Xinhua/Barcroft Images
The European Commission didn't seem to think at first that the so-called "Brexit bill" would be much of an issue. Britain's outstanding debt would be calculated "scientifically", Jean-Claude Juncker said in March, then airily predicting that the final bill would be "around" £50 billion.
Oddly enough, the British are not inclined to hand over their chequebook to the Commission president to fill out as he wishes. They're happy to pay £36 billion, on the proviso that both sides can start on a free trade deal sooner, but that offer falls foul of Brussels' beloved schedule for how these talks should go.
Some European heads of state - like Ireland's Taoiseach, Leo Varadkar - feel that it is "common sense" to not separate such issues, but they have had to give way to the Commission's line - trotted out by Monsieur Juncker this week - that "we settle the past before we look forward to the future".
The bill is part of that "past" Brussels wants to settle, and they have been doing their best to make sure Britain doesn't question the sums they're demanding. Michel Barnier insisted in May that the bill should be "incontestable", and threatened "explosive" consequences if Britain tries to wriggle out of it. The British have since been contesting it, with the "explosive" consequence that Eurocrats are now throwing a collective sulk.
Jean-Claude Juncker led the charge this week in a huffy speech to EU ambassadors, dismissing every paper the British government has put forward – "none of those is satisfactory" – and insisting that "there are an enormous amount of issues that need to be settled". Monsieur Barnier backed him up yesterday with a lecture on why the British need to take negotiations "seriously".
Such a rebuke is typical from the Frenchman, who likes to pose as the elder statesman in these talks. But that doesn't stop him from making puerile gestures, as he did in a piece for Le Monde this week warning that Britain would be less safe after Brexit.
Where to begin with this scaremongering? He has conveniently forgotten about Nato, and the Five Eyes Agreement - neither of which end after Britain leaves the European Union. “Internal security, protecting our external borders and managing crises in our neighborhood are at the heart of our priorities,” Monsieur Barnier intoned. Yet why would he pretend that European security forces would end co-operation with their British counterparts when the continent is still under threat from Isil, and is struggling to find a lasting solution to the migration crisis?
The bloc's chief negotiator knows that co-operation on security and defence would be maintained on a bilateral basis, but he can't resist a melodramatic statement if it might allow him to scare Britain into falling into line.
The increasing stridency in rhetoric from EU officials shows how irked they are about Britain sticking to its guns. If the bloc wants Britain to pay as much as £90 billion as an exit bill, it is up to them to explain why it sees it as appropriate. But accountability is anathema to Brussels, so its negotiators are doing all they can to avoid justifying themselves. Instead, its leading lights are trying to get Britain to agree through their preferred tactics of threats and bullying.
The British have already made clear, in the words of Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, that "we are bill-paying people" who will meet their "legal obligations". Negotiators will set out orally to their counterparts the legal analysis on what they see as their financial commitments. If the EU wants to get more out of Britain before it goes, it should stop throwing its toys out of the pram and pay attention. Open dialogue, rather than petulance, is what both sides need.
EU leaders won't get more money out of Britain by throwing their toys out of the pram
Last edited:
