How much longer are we going to help pay for the EU?

Since April the UK state has borrowed another £33.8bn. We sent £3.6bn of this as net contribution to the EU, an increase of 8% on the amount we sent them for the same time period in 2015. It is time we sent them the letter,repealed the Act and cancelled the subscription. It is the easiest spending cut to make, and will immediately strengthen the balance of payments.

The overall borrowing figures showed some reduction on the previous year. This once again was owing to a big increase in tax. In August Corporation tax was up by 15%, Stamp duty by 14%, Income Tax up by 12% and National Insurance up by 8%. The UK knows how to tax enterprise and effort and wants to tax all who work and venture more. Over the period April to August the growth in tax was less, with National Insurance still up by 8%, Stamp Duty up by 10%, Corporation Tax up by 5% and Income Tax up by 4%. They are large increases when inflation is close to zero.

State debt stood at £1621 bn. More realistically it is around £1200 bn when you take off the large amounts of debt the state now has bought up, and the planned increased purchases over the next few months. The interest cost is still large, despite the ultra low rates that now apply. Total spending in August was up by 4.3%, though by a smaller amount over the five months.

The pattern this year is likely to be more of the same. The aggressive Stamp duty rates will not prevent increases in revenue. The modest abatements at lower house prices should mean there will be more action in much of the market offsetting the much reduced volumes at the high priced end. More people are in work and more people will earn more, fuelling higher receipts from NI and Income Tax.


  1. Richard1
    September 22, 2016

    Surely if we don’t want to breach our treaty obligations we need to trigger article 50, negotiate then stop paying. Just stopping paying is a breach of treaty isn’t it?

    More doom eg from Martin Wolf at the FT. It all seems to hinge on the probability of trade sanctions, especially the removal of the financial passport, if UK implements Brexit and controls immigration and stops paying. Growth forecast down to 1% for 2017 even though the devaluation has already made us poorer in real terms. I wonder who will be right?!

    Reply Yes I want to send the letter and repeal the ACT asap, cancelling the money at the same time

    1. Lifelogic
      September 22, 2016

      To reply indeed the sooner the better and repeal the act as you say. What is May dithering for? She got Hinkley wrong, is still muttering about gender pay reporting and workers on boards and even thought we had control of our borders through Schengen.

      Why should we have confidence in her. She has not even cancelled HS2 yet?

    2. Richard1
      September 22, 2016

      Sounds like a breach of treaty to me.

      Christopher Booker accuses you, Bill Cash and others of being fantasists and comes up with a technical reason why exit other than through EFTA & EEA would mean huge problems – delays and costs – with the flow of goods. Did you see this & how would you respond?

      Reply I have endlessly explained why I disagree with him

      1. Lifelogic
        September 22, 2016

        To reply: I think you are right, the sooner we get the process underway the sooner we finish and fully escape the EU straight jacket.

      2. Denis Cooper
        September 22, 2016

        Goods are flowing smoothly now while we are in the EU and there is no reason why they should not continue to flow smoothly after we have left the EU, if that is what all parties wished to happen. Of course if some other governments in the EU preferred to cause unnecessary disruption of the existing flow of goods, and so harm their own countries as well as ours, and also disregard the EU treaties in the process, then they could do that, but it would not be because of insuperable technical obstacles. The question then is why we should want such stupid and spiteful foreign governments to have any hand in the government of our country.

        1. Jerry
          September 23, 2016

          @Denis Cooper; “Of course if some other governments in the EU preferred to cause unnecessary disruption of the existing flow of goods”

          That is an important if, and if they or careerist eurocrats did so would it actually have that much of an effect on the EU27 economy compared to the UK’s. For example one in five cars made by EU27 companies are sold in the UK, production that could easily be filled by new or existing markets, and perhaps do so with cost savings.

          Eurocrats will be on guard, a successful Brexit could become a model for the break up of the EU, in the same way as the Spanish government put the dampers on the SNP’s idea that an iScotland could simply retain/attain immediate and full membership of the EU upon independence (never mind keep the GBP rather than having to adopt the Euro) because a successful iScoland withion the EU would be a model for the Catalonia etc.

          1. Denis Cooper
            September 24, 2016

            6 million jobs across the rest of the EU are connected to exports to the UK. Maybe they could shrug off the loss of some or many or all of those jobs, maybe not. But if they were so damned stupid and spiteful and untrustworthy that they did that then it would provide even more evidence that we were right to leave the EU. In fact that is already happening every time that Juncker and Schulz and Verhofstadt open their mouths. I would remind you of Article 8 TEU on the EU’s neighbourhood policy.

          2. Jerry
            September 27, 2016

            @Denis Cooper; So you keep repeating but never say how many jobs in the UK are dependant on access to the EU27 markets, jobs that might only exist because of the UK’s tariff free access to the EU27.

            As I’ve said before, ask why the UK imports from the EU27, it is often quite different to why the EU27 imports from the UK. Basically the UK needs to import, hence why post Brexit many are either desperate to forge new trade links beyond the EU27 or want to re-industrialise, on the other hand the EU27 choose to import (often their own products) from the UK even though they could manufacture within the EU27 and often have the spare capacity to do just that.

            I would also remind you that Article 8 of TEU is a two way process. Sounds to me that you are another who wants to try playing the EU rules against the EU, just remember that those who write the rule book are often the better player of such rules…

        2. a-tracy
          September 24, 2016

          Denis, the French are disrupting the free movement of goods into France, perhaps we should adopt the Macron Law in the UK to protect our Living Wage + wages on UK soil.

      3. Jagman84
        September 22, 2016

        A breach of treaty of an organisation that the electorate has rejected membership of in a referendum. How about the breach of trust of the electorate? As far as I am aware, Chris Booker is unelected and so his opinion is simply that. An opinion, not a fact.

        1. Jerry
          September 23, 2016

          @Jagman84; “As far as I am aware, Chris Booker is unelected and so his opinion is simply that. An opinion, not a fact.”

          Not sure what your point is there, after all his point appears to be far more in touch with what a majority of elected MPs are saying, hence why many Brexiteers are so desperate to avoid the need for any more than the absolute minimum number of votes in the HoC to achieve Brexit…

    3. Jerry
      September 22, 2016

      @Richard1; As for your second paragraph, when will some people just accept that if one leave a Golf Club access to the 19th hole also goes. If we wish to retain “Friends of the club” (associate) status and thus retain access to the said 19th hole etc. then we will have to agree to abide by at least some of ‘Le clubs’ rules otherwise we will just have to find another watering hole!

      Off topic, sort of, I note that the FSB, and their members, are the most pessimistic for four years, wonder why?…

      1. Patrick Geddes
        September 22, 2016

        It’s an odd golf club where there are 27 members all with voting rights but only 7 pay subscriptions into the club and the remaining members enjoy the benefits with some a actually taking money out of the club.

        1. John C.
          September 23, 2016

          This is more to the point, but it was a silly analogy to start with.

          1. Jerry
            September 24, 2016

            Patrick, John, et al; You think the analogy is “silly” because you do not like the facts.

            Who voted for the principle that allowed there to be ’28 members, all with voting rights, of which only 7 pay any membership fees’, yes the seven, including the UK!

          2. Edward2
            September 24, 2016

            But it’s a six to one decision.

          3. Jerry
            September 24, 2016

            @Edward2; Assuming I get your drift, and that comment was directed towards me, no context as usual… That’s called democracy, just as it was when the same six voted to give the UK our rebate or our opt-outs etc..

            I’ll be glade when the UK actual has had Brexit and is out of the EU, perhaps then as a nation we will grow up (once again) and stop acting like the spoilt Violet Elizabeth Bott from the “Just William” stories -screaming and stamping her feet until, or if she doesn’t, get her own way.

          4. Edward2
            September 25, 2016

            Your point was that we voted for it and you said that was a fact.
            I pointed out that it’s 6 to 1 against the UK
            So we didn’t and you are wrong.
            Seems straightforward to me.

          5. Jerry
            September 27, 2016

            @Edward2; Then you confirm that you do not actually believe in democracy, supporters of CND will be please to know that you think they should be allowed to withhold a proportion of their taxes that they consider goes to fund the UK nuclear determinant, or that car owners who disagree with the laws on having valid VED and insurance should be allowed to disobey the law!

          6. Edward2
            September 27, 2016

            Total nonsense
            You have in other posts put quotation marks around words I never said now here you make up opinions which I do not hold.

          7. Jerry
            September 28, 2016

            @Edward2; Changing your rant again Eddie, what ever, but might I also suggest that you check your facts, single quotation marks (sometimes called inverted comers) in British English grammar do not always indicate a direct quotation.

            Getting back on-topic, the point you refuse to admit is that democracy (be it political, boardroom, the mothers union and WI) only needs a majority, not unanimity, otherwise according to your ‘logic’ [1] all the UK governments since 1945 -at least- have had no mandate what so ever even though they had a majority!

            [1] that was irony by the way

        2. Edward2
          September 28, 2016

          You aim your attack on me and then add a sentence which you then put in quotation marks.
          Most people other than you would consider you were quoting something I had said.
          When in fact you had made it up.
          Your own imagining of what you think I believe.
          Single quotation marks or not.
          I thought you were a ‘stickler for accuracy’ Jerry

      2. Denis Cooper
        September 22, 2016

        This is part of the rules:

        “The Union shall develop a special relationship with neighbouring countries, aiming to establish an area of prosperity and good neighbourliness, founded on the values of the Union and characterised by close and peaceful relations based on cooperation.”

        1. Jerry
          September 23, 2016

          @Denis Cooper; But “good neighbourliness” and “cooperation” is a two way process, constant bickering, constant disputes about who has the right to cut the grass verge out front (that nether actually own but both want to claim) etc, in the end such neighbours tend to co-exits but rarely cooperate.

          1. Denis Cooper
            September 24, 2016

            But nothing, even though we do not want to share our house or our bank account we have no intention to be anything other than a good neighbour for the others.

          2. Jerry
            September 25, 2016

            @Denis Cooper; Then we will be happy to keep to our internationally recognised 12 mile territorial waters, post Brexit we will retain scientifically based fishing quoter’s, nor object if another country fishing trawlers come up to 12.1 miles from shore with their nets out for example – fat chance of Europhobes being very nice neighbours about that, is there!…

            Then of course some Europhobes will will object if the EU removes membership privileges from the UK upon Brexit, such as the automatic right of British citizens to live, even work (perhaps even as self employed, after all if a Brit sets up as a builder in Spain then a Spanish builder is going to loose work), in the UK when the UK removes the right of EU citizens to do likewise in the UK.

            The EU27 is quite willing to be good neighbour, but the UK will have to be prepared to give as well as take.

      3. Lifelogic
        September 22, 2016

        If they wish to export their goods to us they will have to agree to some trade rules and as they export more to us it is rather more in their interests than ours to come to some sensible (trade only) arrangement.

        The 50% of our trade and 10% of their (or whatever it was) argument put out by the Cameron types (and the BBC) was always totally bogus, it is the size of the trade that matters not the relative %.

        1. Jerry
          September 23, 2016

          @LL; “50% of our trade and 10% of their”

          How many more times… We do not buy from the EU27 out of a sense of charity, the UK buys because we no longer make such goods, the EU27 on the other hand could survive without selling a single spring washer to the UK, they could probably survive without selling that washer to the world, just as the USA could and has in the past.

          The UK’s sense of over importances, in the world, has always been our downfall, “the world can’t possibly survive without us, doing as we tell then” – oh yes it can…

          1. Edward2
            September 24, 2016

            How many more times Jerry
            It’s not about trade.
            It’s about being an independent nation free to govern ourselves and make our own laws.
            For better or for worse.
            However I believe we will prosper and that both us and the EU wI’ll be much happier..

          2. Jerry
            September 24, 2016

            @Edward2; “It’s about being an independent nation free to govern ourselves and make our own laws.”

            Sorry to hear that you wish the UK to become another Zimbabwe, that is the sort of nonsense a state gets into when “being an independent nation free to govern ourselves” or a political dogma is placed on a pedestal to the detriment of all common sense [1], thankfully for the rest of us it is very much about trade, both with our near neighbours and the RotW.

            [1] same problem is/has overtaken to Venezuela more recently

          3. Edward2
            September 25, 2016

            Zimbabwe !
            Come on Jerry
            Is that your best reply?

      4. libertarian
        September 22, 2016


        Its not the FSB members its what laughably passes for leadership that are pessimistic. Why? because like the CBI, IOD and others in the political & lobby bubble they are stuck in remain group think. The FSB has 200,000 members of which only 12,000 do any business outside the UK. The FSB member survey is so stacked in favour of “Brexit problems” that its worthless as a survey . More than 58% of FSB members where in favour of Brexit

        1. Jerry
          September 23, 2016

          @libertarian; All in your personal opinion of course… Also what difference does it make if a business does any business outside the UK or not?!

      5. Anonymous
        September 22, 2016

        Stupid comment, Jerry.

        What golf club demands you how to spend your own money, what the rules you can apply in your own house and who you should have living there ?

      6. Mark Watson
        September 22, 2016

        Living wage and auto pension enrolment mostly.

        1. a-tracy
          September 23, 2016

          Agreed Mark, pay differentials to keep above the Living wage too. The Living wage is to go up by 6% every year for the next four years, pushing up their other pay bands, I think this is just dawning on small business owners.

          Auto pension gives an effective 15.8% national insurance contribution from the Employer over the lel from this October. Employer’s NI was always intended as an Employer’s contribution towards a state pension, dole, the NHS and sickness benefits to a greater % amount than the employee pays and for longer as they continue for the Employer over the state retirement age.

    4. Hope
      September 22, 2016

      There is no reason not to send the letter. She is deliberating delaying in the hope of proving EU light is the best deal for the UK.

      Sadiqu Khan reported today in all the papers that terrorism is part and parcel of living in a big city, is he mad? Has he last leave of any sense he has? No it is not acceptable and he had failed his duty to make sure the public are safe from all harm. Nor should we accept mass immigration, adverse changes to our Culture, values or beliefs. Sharia law nor any imported crime i.e. FGM, honour killings, forced marriages should not be tolerated or accepted as part of life in a big city. It demonstrates to me why he is unfit to be in politics. We do not need mayors either. That was an EU regionalisation plan that needs to be scrapped.

    5. Denis Cooper
      September 22, 2016

      When one of the most senior journalists on the FT writes:

      “I would like a government prepared to overturn the referendum.”

      then one knows that everything which appears in that newspaper must be taken with an even larger pinch of salt than might have been thought previously.

      Martin Wolf does have history; here from 1997 is a compilation entitled:

      “Britain and EMU. The case for joining”

      and it is interesting to read his contribution:

      “The danger of dithering”.

      Then he saw “betrayal of democracy” not in the government dismissing the clear result of a referendum which it had decided to hold, as he now advocates, but just in the failure of the main parties to decide whether or not we should join EMU; then he conceded that “the net economic benefits of EU membership are roughly zero”, but nonetheless on essentially political grounds “early entry into European economic and monetary union would be best for Britain”; but at the same time, “Britain could thrive outside the EU”, whereas now it seems leaving the EU would be so economically catastrophic that he would prefer to see the government simply ignore what a majority of voters said on June 23rd.

      1. Richard1
        September 22, 2016

        His argument seems to be that if / when the UK leaves the EU there will be a trade war. It’s the same argument as was used in the referendum. What would be interesting to know is whether such commentators would view Brexit as negative or not if we manage to avoid a trade war. I assume the UK would treat the removal of financial passporting as an act of trade war and retaliate in some way.

        I’ve also never seen Martin Wolf, or other such pro-EU economic commentators make a reasoned assessment of the potential risks and liabilities of staying in.

        I would agree with him however that a trade war would be very undesirable for both sides – but would hit the UK proportionately harder.

    6. Denis Cooper
      September 22, 2016

      It’s very frustrating that Cast-Iron Cameron broke his word, yet again, and gave the enemies of the British people a window of opportunity to start legal cases to delay and if possible prevent the service of the Article 50 notice, but that is what has happened and we have to bear with it. As long as that notice does actually go in we can put up with a few more months on top of the forty three years we have been entangled with the EEC/EC/EU/USE project.

      The government cannot send in the notice until the Supreme Court has confirmed that it has the power to do so without any further parliamentary process, and it would severely undermine if not totally destroy the government’s case if it agreed that it would only act after MPs had voted for a resolution. That would be sure to prompt an application to the court for an emergency injunction to stop it on the grounds that the required parliamentary process was the passage of a full Act, not just a resolution passed by MPs or even by both Houses.

      If you want the government to promote a Bill immediately then I would suggest that it should be a Bill to amend the Parliament Acts and reduce the period for which the Lords are permitted to delay any Bill to just a month. That would send the unelected legislators-for-life in the Lords a crystal clear message that defiance of the will of the electors as directly expressed in the referendum will have consequences for their chamber, not abolition but neutralisation.

    7. Richard Butler
      September 22, 2016

      UK financial services will not re-locate into the EU en-mass, here are some of the reasons;

      1) Moody’s this week said Banks will cope perfectly well
      2) Banks can establish a brass plate on a desk in Dublin, simple
      3) The City relies on each players own personal social network, face to face socialising over many years, and information harvested gives one the edge. You just cannot up-sticks to windy Frankfurt and talk to a lamp post. Furthermore the City is a hive of synergy with all the specialists in one place.

      4) Equivalence will likely apply to the likes of Japan, and will obviously apply to British FS institutions, already aligned with the EU
      5) Many institutions such as Aviva are already present in the EU, and will easily manage the transition and wont be leaving the dynamic, light touch profitable UK
      6) Japan sells a similar value of services into the EU, with no trade deal at all!
      7) FS firms would be very reluctant to leave ‘light-touch’, less intrusive UK Government

      8) In the EU and EEA, 8,000 firms hold passports for doing business in the UK

      In the end it is inconceivable core EU exporter nations would wish to embark on a process of hampering trade. Imagine UK supermarkets cancelling contracts with French farmers and wine producers, in favour of UK, Australian, Chilean, Brazilian, NZ (wine, flour, lamb etc) and other producers.

      Spain and Portugal derive significant supplies from UK fishing grounds and the border states derive significant comfort from our military projection, no way will they want all this put at risk.

    8. Anonymous
      September 22, 2016

      Richard1 @5.47

      Nothing much has to change on passporting.

      Banking regulation in London is some of the best around – and certainly the best in Europe.

      Deutsche Bank has a legacy of bad loans, US penalties for bad behaviour and and low capital. Germany’s Landesbanken are unreformed. The Italian banking system is a mess.

      The ECB and the Bundesbank are based in Frankfurt where the ECB has conflicting responsibilities between its role in setting interest rates and that of supervising banks. Yet the Bundesbank has to go along with negative interest and quantitative easing to keep the EU afloat .

      The lack of banking union and an emergency fund for re-capitalising the banking system is the problem with the eurozone.

      You think London’s passporting rights are the problem ??? They should be glad to have us !

    9. Ronald Olden
      September 23, 2016

      It is not possible to introduce ‘Trade Sanctions’ against the UK. It’s illegal under WTO rules. Trade Sanctions are UN inspired weapons of economic war used against rogue states. It us not yet regarded as a war crime to refuse to join the EU.

      All they can do us force EU countries consumers to pay tariffs on imports from the UK. Maximum WTO tariffs aren’t very high anyway. But if they we’d have identical tariffs.

      So what’s the point of that. And why would Germany want Trade Sanctions against a country in which their car and other companies have huge investments. Mrs Merkel is in enough difficulty as it is without offending her party’s backers. They sell us more than we sell them anyway.

  2. DaveM
    September 22, 2016

    When you write stuff like this with evident frustration it’s hard to believe you’re a senior elected MP on the same side of the house as the PM. And assuming you’re not alone in your opinions, it makes me wonder why we have representatives at all – bearing in mind most of England voted out (by constituency), their elected representatives are being totally ignored by the dictatorial PM. Maybe it’s time to bring some real pressure to bear and voice the frustration (inside the Westminster bubble) of the electorate which put the government in power?

    1. Hope
      September 22, 2016

      JR is in a minority within his own party so it should not come as a surprise. Similarly those MPs who were part of project fear are now in senior positions in cabinet! They also form the majority of cabinet, this is the real shocker that those people who fought against the UK leaving the EU by any means are now responsible for leading UK out of the EU and allegedly negotiating the best deal for our country. Hands up who believes they will act in our country’s best interest and not try to tie the country to the EU?

    2. Graham
      September 22, 2016

      It does appear,from the deafening silence from those in ‘power’, that we have a phoney Leave vote which the voting public seem unable to move on.

      Why JR can’t get to see those at the top to voice our concerns is a substantial worry in itself.

      The original vote to stay by TM also haunts me as the Remainers regroup.

    3. acorn
      September 22, 2016

      I don’t remember electing a Teresa May government. I can remember we elected a Cameron government last year. I think I now understand that a “fixed term” parliament, doesn’t mean you get a fixed term government. You can get a model change mid term, without the inconvenience of having to vote for it.

      1. StephenS
        September 22, 2016

        As has always been the case. There is a difference between the legislature and the Executive, and this split has existed for hundreds of years.

      2. Denis Cooper
        September 22, 2016

        I think you elected an MP for your constituency.

      3. libertarian
        September 22, 2016


        You have never ever voted for any government in this country. Its not how our system works

        1. John C.
          September 23, 2016

          It’s a curious myth, that persists, that we do not vote for a government. Of course, in theory we vote for an M.P., but it just isn’t reality to declare that people choose their MP with not a thought as to which party he belongs to or who that leader of that party might be. That is what determines the overwhelming majority of votes. Another part of the great myth is that the Monarch chooses who should lead his or her government.
          It all sounds wonderfully arcane and traditional and slightly perverse, and this is why it attracts some people including myself, who have a hankering for old traditions and customs. But it’s wilfully silly to really believe that we do not elect a government or that the Queen chooses her Prime Minister.

      4. Peter Parsons
        September 22, 2016

        The fixed term parliament act has nothing to do with the change of model. For other examples see: Gordon Brown, John Major, James Callaghan. The reality is that we do not vote for a government, nor do we vote for a Prime Minister. To do that would require a national vote much like the EU referendum where every vote counted equally (unlike the system we have today).

        1. acorn
          September 23, 2016

          All true. I vote for a constituency MP, and that’s all. I don’t get to choose the candidate, the Westminster institutional system, tells me what colour rosette I will be given a choice of.

          In the New Forest, the last time the blue rosette didn’t win was back in 1910, when it was one constituency. Which piece of lobby fodder the rosette is pinned to, is irrelevant.

          Reply Some candidates lose so called safe seats. Do not underestimate the power of the ballot. Remember Michael Portillo, Ed Balls etc

          1. Peter Parsons
            September 24, 2016

            Ed Balls had a majority of just 1,101 in the 2010 election which made his seat the 45th most marginal in the country:


            Hardly a safe seat.

  3. Mark B
    September 22, 2016

    Good morning.

    Our host goes from brilliance to stupidity in little or no time. If we were to cut off payments to the EU, what does he think the EU would do in return ? It is like me wanting to cut off paying the government all those taxes it receives he mentions further down. What would the government do to me if I decided I too did not wish to pay its dues ? A fine ? Prison ? Loss of access to services ? All three ?

    As someone who is part of our legislation process the first thing he should be saying is; “We do not like the rules we signed up to but, we signed them in good faith and shall abide by them.”

    And as for the 8% increase, who negotiated that ? Oh, don’t tell me, I know who.

    I wish to leave at the same time!

    1. Lifelogic
      September 22, 2016

      That is not usually the best way to negotiate seriously at all. You use every lever you have. It is not cricket we are playing (not that cricket is cricket really any more, if indeed it ever was).

      The public did not sign up to these rules at all, we were rammed into them by dishonest politicians who had no authority from the people ever to do so. I did not see much “good faith” around. Indeed they went out of their way to prevent the people having any say in the matter at all. This despite endless promises to the contrary near elections. As we saw with Cast Iron until he was finally forced into one and even then he slanted the pitch in a hugely immoral way with public money and endless lies and threats.

      Perhaps the biggest lie coming from T May – “We have control of our borders through Schengen” sure we do Theresa!

      Also the EU courts have stretched (rewritten even) the laws so absurdly so that the EU can dictate in almost any area they like.

    2. Hope
      September 22, 2016

      Remember Cameron’s claim he reduced the EU budget; he forgot to say that the UK contribution would increase. JR is bleating about this now but hailed it as a victory for Cameron when he made his claim. A bit like the veto that never was, he would not pay the extra £1.7 billion and did so on the quiet, he would not pay the £90 million for refurbishment of Strasbourg, the second parliament ha that cost us a fortune. The list of false claims about the EU is endless. There are no plans for an EU army we were told it is pure fantasy claimed Clegg. Hague claimed he vetoed the plan. Lies seem to roll off MPs tongues as if it is not wrong to do so.

    3. Ed Mahony
      September 22, 2016

      Sorry, but if the Japanese, Americans and Chinese come across articles like this, they’re just going to think, more and more, that the UK’s politicians are driving the UK into an isolationist position, and that the UK isn’t a country they can really invest heavily in in the future. It’s too risky for them. Plus, it doesn’t encourage the Japanese, Americans and Chinese to make favourable trade deals with us in the future. Japan has been very clear in what it thinks already – hard Brexit is out. And it has the clout to follow through its words. The US and China have said similar things.
      And then of course, the EU won’t be happy either (and we still have to trade with the EU).
      Lastly, the rest of the world isn’t going to be confident in investing and making trade deals with the UK either, if we really get the noses up of the Japanese, Americans and Chinese (as well as the EU).

      1. Denis Cooper
        September 22, 2016

        When is Japan going to adopt an open-door immigration policy?

        “Don’t do as I do, do as I say.”

        1. Ed Mahony
          September 23, 2016

          ‘When is Japan going to adopt an open-door immigration policy?’

          – Who cares? What matters is the realpolitik and that if we get under the noses of the Japanese, they’ll stop investing with the UK, to the extent they have, and give us a lousy trade deal = less Jobs + Prosperity in the UK.

          1. Denis Cooper
            September 23, 2016

            I care.

            The Japanese would not be prepared to have open-door immigration as the price of trade, and nor am I prepared to have it at their behest either as the price of trade or as the price of their investment .

            If the Japanese companies based here cannot cope with the changed circumstances after we leave the EU – which I expect that mostly they will – then that will be unfortunate but we and they will just have to live with it.

            I read that about 140,000 jobs are with those Japanese companies in the UK, very welcome of course and we don’t want to lose them, but they are actually less than 0.5% of the total 31.6 million jobs in the UK.

            Moreover according to this report:


            “Prior to the financial crisis, the UK saw on average 4 million jobs created and 3.7 million jobs lost each year”, and 140,000 corresponds to that natural “churn” in the UK jobs market over a period of just two weeks.

      2. Anonymous
        September 22, 2016


        I’m sure President Trump will be sympathetic.

        As I said before. The Japanese are monoculturalist yet demand we flood our country with immigration and be ruled from abroad in order to be able the trade with them.

        Perhaps if there’d been a little more respect for our own people and rather less for the rulers of others we might have voted to remain in the EU.

        1. Ed Mahony
          September 23, 2016

          ‘I’m sure President Trump will be sympathetic’

          – I don’t think so. He said, ‘bad trade deals cost jobs.’ He’s a tough businessman and he’ll be as ruthless as he can to get the best trade deal for the US.

          ‘Perhaps if there’d been a little more respect for our own people and rather less for the rulers of others we might have voted to remain in the EU.’

          – It’s sad then that people can’t rise above this thing ‘respect’ as a reason for voting for or against something so important that will affect our country in so many ways – economically as well as in terms of the peace, prosperity and security of Europe on our backdoor.

          Brexiteers say this country is ‘great.’ I agree but not for the same reasons as many of them claim. The reality is that our country is deeply divided and broken (like other countries). To an important degree, we’re individualistic and atomised. And when we do come together, it’s often in cliques (social, economic, cultural, racial) or in a wave of emotional, national hysteria (from one degree to another, e.g. the maudlin mood that followed the death of Princess Diana to now with the exaggerated fear of the EU).

        2. Ed Mahony
          September 23, 2016

          ‘Perhaps if there’d been a little more respect for our own people and rather less for the rulers of others we might have voted to remain in the EU’

          – Also, although the Remainers tried to MANIPULATE the fears and emotions of ‘ordinary’ voters, so did the Brexiteers. The only difference being that the Brexiteers did it more successfully. So much of the referendum on both sides was about manipulation of people (and just lies) instead of good, frank and HONEST debate!

          1. Anonymous
            September 23, 2016

            Ed – The people could SEE the Brexiter’s ‘fears’ with their own eyes.

            The Remainer’s ‘fears’ were all notional.

            That’s the difference.

    4. Ed Mahony
      September 22, 2016

      Sorry, didn’t mean to leave my last comment under yours (no connection, although i agree we would get up the noses of the EU if we did that which wouldn’t be good for all kinds of reasons, including future trade with the EU).

    5. Mockbeggar
      September 22, 2016

      The point is that we don’t have to wait two years after invoking Article 50. We can simply tell them we are leaving… and leave! There doesn’t have to be a ‘negotiation’.

      People and companies will go on trading with each other because it’s in their mutual interest to do so – whatever governments may huff and puff about.

      The city is already looking for ways to get round any ‘passporting’ restrictions should they be imposed – which they shouldn’t be seeing that we have the same regulations and restrictions as other EU members. Current non EU members have passporting agreements with EU countries and there is no reason why we shouldn’t have the same rights after we’ve left.

      1. Jerry
        September 22, 2016

        @Mockbeggar; “The point is that we don’t have to wait two years after invoking Article 50. We can simply tell them we are leaving… and leave!

        No we can not just leave, if we choose to use the A50 route. The best we can do is simply refuse to accept any of the EU27’s suggested terms and then sit out the two years or ask them to agree that we want nothing and thus Brexit early, before the two years.

        Brexit via A50 is a two way process, us and the EU27, what is more all EU27 member nations have to agree to the exit terms, hence why some want a Article 50 free “hard Brexit” because it is very unlikely we will retain access to what we wish without accepting much we do not want and which is now politically untenable for the current government.

        1. anon
          September 22, 2016

          We serve article 50, we set a 4 week deadline whereby we will exit with no agreement, if this unlikely as it most certainly looks like.

          We must not suffer further distraction about the EU and get on with trade with the ROW, sans the single cartel et al

          1. Jerry
            September 23, 2016

            @Anon; If we use Article 50 we can not do that, not without the agreement of all the other EU27, stop thinking we can dictate the pace of A50, we can not – in fact at the time of the Lisbon Treaty ratification many (europhiles, eurosceptics and those just opposed to the LT) commented that A50 was written in a way that would discourage leaving…

            Hence why some want to avoid A50n and go for a hard Brexit of some sort.

    6. Richard Butler
      September 22, 2016

      ‘If we were to cut off payments to the EU, what does he think the EU would do in return’?

      Well what did the EU do when France more than once deported whole Roman communities breaking EU rules? Nothing.
      What happened when Italy put a catapult on the front of Italian made boats (thus conferring a ‘military dimension’ ), to get around the rules on tendering? Nothing.

      What is happening to those taking unilateral decisions to disbar ‘refugees’, or exclude Muslim ‘refugees’? Not a lot.

      The EU is impotent, call their bluff.
      SM membership is vastly over-rated, I believe it is thought to contribute no more than 0.65% to GDP.

      With our competitive currency and by cancelling the membership fee we’re already up on the deal and free of EU constraints the financial opportunities are vast.

      1. Jerry
        September 22, 2016

        @Richard Butler; You have pointed out one of the biggest problems with the EU, there is not the necessary equality between member states, but quite a few “cliques”, founder members (which France is one) seem to be able to do as they please and twist the rules to suite, whilst ex Warsaw Pack member countries are still being given considerable leeway.

    7. Ed Mahony
      September 22, 2016

      I agree about our host being brilliant (on energy for example). Although i think he’s unwise about the EU (articles like this).
      I think Mr Redwood would be the best person to push for the growth of the high-tech industry in this country, so that we can create the IBMs, the Apples, and the Facebooks of the future (as well as a host of other companies most people haven’t heard of but are big employers and worth lots of money).
      Whether we go for soft or hard Brexit, or even if we remained in the EU, we’ve got to grow our high-tech industry (and yes government does have an important role to play). Instead of allowing our companies to be taken over before they become really big. And just encouraging growth in this industry in general. Mr Redwood would be great in this role as he has both the business and technical intelligence / attention-to-detail needed for this.
      Also, why aren’t the talents of Lord Hague and Two Brains Willets not being used in government? Shame.

    8. getahead
      September 22, 2016

      What do YOU think the EU would do in return Mark?

  4. Prigger
    September 22, 2016

    One way or another we are rash with our money—payments to the EU— “gifting” of materiel to foreign gangs so they can fight and kill this or that dictator who has temporarily fallen out of favour with us—“humanitarian aid” money to bribe despots—paying wages to temporary migrants who send them straight out of the country— Then, the defence budget. Huge.
    But when we need our streets defended against rascals from all those countries we are busy “defending” we find our authorities are skint. They do not have gun-trained police officers in any realistic number. A Tornado aircraft with the smartest of bombs is still a bit clumsy taking out a pressure-cooker bomber on the High Street. An aircraft carrier is a smidgen too large for sneaking up on a terrorist along a canal in the midlands. But our Defence department has a feverishly pretty website. Shock and Awe!

    1. Excalibur
      September 23, 2016

      Totally agree, Prigger. Apart from the Express, there is no mention in the British media of the torching of cars in Malmo and in Copenhagen. More than a hundred in the past three months. If this idea catches on, our country and those of the EU could become ungovernable.

  5. APL
    September 22, 2016

    JR: “It is time we sent them the letter,repealed the Act and cancelled the subscription. ”

    I don’t know why you insist on being disingenuous. In accord with the Lisbon Treaty, which the Parliament you were a member of, ratified. The article 50 procedure stipulates, notification of intent to leave the EU, and a two year period of negotiations.

    Now, you can sit on your hands during that two year period and do nothing if you want, but in order to comply with the freely entered contract you had oversight of, it’s two years and not until the end of that two year period do you stop paying EU contributions.

    Reply You can reach a deal or agree to no deal in a much shorter time period than 2 years.2 years is the maximum

  6. Roy Grainger
    September 22, 2016

    The chances of us stopping payments now is zero. We will keep paying for at least 2 years after A50 has been triggered and the negotiations are continuing.

    There was an interesting article in the Guardian (of all places) yesterday noting that the impact of Brexit was far less than many expected. Unfortunately there was also a new guess from the OECD about UK’s growth rate next year which seems set to induce Mr Carney to cut interest rates even further and do more QE. It is a somewhat paradoxical situation that here and in the USA bad economic news (real or imagined) causes the stockmarket to rise due to the expectation the central bank will therefore keep spraying printed money into the system.

    Incidentally, one of the commercial property funds that closed for withdrawals after the Brexit vote (to such wails from the Remainiacs) has now quietly opened again having had no problem in selling some of their properties to increase liquidity. The others will follow soon.

    Reply Several have reopened and some valuers now acceot decent commercial properties have not fallen in value at all!

  7. Lifelogic
    September 22, 2016

    Allister Heath is perhaps a bit optimistic but we can but hope. Not much sign of that annihilation of the liberal left at the BBC for example. I am not even convinced that T May is not firmly part of the liberal left. Her decisions so far are rather poor (or she has dithered like a rabbit caught in the headlights. Worker on boards. no points based systems, not ruling out staying in the “single market”, gender pay reporting, Hinkley …….

    She has not even cancelled Osborne’s bonkers national wage controls yet, his absurd stamp duty tax rates, HS2 or said anything on inheritance tax.

    She has a huge opportunity, more grammar schools are welcome, but can she deliver or is it a distraction policy? More state funded religious schools (Islamic and others) on the other hand sounds rather worrying for social cohesion. I will give her until the Autumn Statement before writing her off as just another dire Heath, Major, Osborne, Cameron type (perhaps pretending not to be as Cameron did to get the job).

  8. Lifelogic
    September 22, 2016

    Meanwhile back at our wonderful NHS. Breast cancer patients are not getting drugs they need for the sake of under 50p a day. I am sure most would happily pay if they knew (but I do not suppose they are told the truth). Cataract operations can take over 18 months to organise and being denied to older patients (must do wonders for these people’s work productivity).

    Also last minute cancellations of most operations are only counted if cancelled on the day of admission. So the really last minute cancellation figure they record is a huge lie (or blatant propaganda at least).

    I know of people who have had operations cancelled 3 or more times and have even than needed more expensive treatment caused by the delays.

    They also pretend people can get a certain number cycles of IVF subject to certain rules but rarely is this being delivered and not at all in many areas. Why do they pretend? Why not just tell people they will have to pay at least then they at least know the reality and are not kept hanging about until they are 40+ and past it anyway!

    And that is just the dire NHS (Cameron’s priority in three letters) news that is out today!

  9. Ian Wragg
    September 22, 2016

    Not only have we continued to contribute we have also allowed another 40000 immigrants from the EU since referendum day. This will continue right until we finally leave.
    As for the deficit,Gideons plan hasn’t worked too well. Doubling the population doesn’t double GDP. It just makes us all poorer and increases the deficit.

  10. Denis Cooper
    September 22, 2016

    “How much longer are we going to help pay for the EU?”

    Possibly for as long as the EU endures, plus some more years after that until its affairs have been finally and completely wound up.

    The reason being that with permission and often encouragement from UK governments over the past four decades the tentacles of the EU have gradually extended into all kinds of areas of international co-operation where we will wish to continue to participate.

    Maybe in some cases we will be able to do that via a direct subscription to the relevant organisation, but I guess that in some other cases our financial contribution may still be passed through the EU budget.

    I’m not too concerned about that, because it should quickly reduce to much less than we are paying now. There will be a few years when we will have to continue to meet our obligations under commitments which have already been made, even if we have no enthusiasm for some of them, and then as time goes by it will move to paying just for the things we really want.

    If the EU does collapse, as it might, then that will be akin to the liquidation of a company, and that can go on for years until it is finally completed.

  11. Jerry
    September 22, 2016

    “Since April the UK state has borrowed another £33.8bn. We sent £3.6bn of this as net contribution to the EU”

    Thus our contributions to the EU is a mere drop in the ocean, relatively, were is the other £30.2bn (plus the entire, direct and indirect, HRMC tax receipts) going!…

    Perhaps we need to look much closer to home, after all since 1979 the government, quangos, agencies and other arms-length bodies (such as NHS Trusts) have all grown like topsy compared to the so called centralised “stateism” that existed before.

    1. Patrick Geddes
      September 22, 2016

      It’s remarkable that someone would consider £3.6 billion pounds a trifling sum of money.
      I’m sure our health service could make better use of all or some of that money.

      1. Jerry
        September 23, 2016

        @Patrick Geddes; I said “relatively” and £3.6bn is, compared to the entire government budget – put it this way, the NHS over-spend for 2015 was something like 2/3rds that of our net contributions top the EU.

    2. Mitchel
      September 22, 2016

      Re your last paragraph:ie cut back on what has either been little more than “workfare” for the middle classes or the development of the liberal left Party state or both.

      Lifelogic’s favourite commentator Mr Heath in the Telegraph asserts that the liberal left has now been banished by Chairman May(“not in government and not in power”).Can’t see it myself.

      Bonfire night is approaching,what is the lady going to heap on the pyre,apart from George Osborne’s remaining stock of HiVis jackets?

  12. Glenn Vaughan
    September 22, 2016


    You are preaching to the converted.

    A copy of this blog should be sent to Mrs May, Mr Hammond and his colleagues at the Treasury as only they can bring about the changes that you and we desire.

  13. stred
    September 22, 2016

    The Thames Crossing tunnels have been closed due to accidents and an electrical fault over the last two weeks, causing particularly long delays and diversions. I arrived at the tunnel entrance after an hour long queue and then Highways England stopped all traffic for another 20 minutes while repair vehicles went through to repair a barrier on the other side. Quite why a bent barrier at the side cause thousands of hours of delay and a total overnight closure is another question.

    While waiting, drivers turned off their engines and got out of their cars and lorries. the lorry drivers were desperate to find a place to stop because of limits and tachographs. What I noticed was that many car drivers were Polish and Lithuanian. Possibly about half the cars were from the EU. AS many people will be trying to arrive before any cut of in the present arrangements happens, immigration numbers may be rising.

    As Mrs May’s old department depends on interviews at ports to estimate numbers, these figures are likely to be unreliable. The computer linked cameras read number plate and they are supposed to charge tolls to continental drivers. A look at these numbers would be a more accurate way to determine the real numbers. Meanwhile pressure on health, housing and other services grows and the jams get longer.

  14. Ralph Musgrave
    September 22, 2016

    Re JR’s claim that “the interest cost is large” on the national debt, the rate of interest paid has been about equal to inflation for several years, which means the cost in REAL TERMS (which is what really matters) is around zero.

    As to what to do if creditors want a significantly higher rate of interest, that’s easy: print money and pay off debt as it matures, then tell creditors to get lost. As for the idea that that money printing might be inflationary, well we’ve been printing money and buying up debt on an astronomic scale over the last 5 years. That’s called “QE” – and where’s the inflation?

    But if inflation did rear its ugly head, that’s easily dealt with by simply raising taxes and “unprinting” the money collected: by throwing the £10 notes collected on a fire, to put it figuratively.

  15. Bert Young
    September 22, 2016

    It is foolish to pay money into a pot that simply creates more imbalance ; the EU knows it is in for a free ride and has protected itself with all sorts of threats and conditions to maintain its status quo .

    Getting ourselves out of this mess is essential for our identity , independence and common sense ; the sooner this is achieved the better . One look at the champagne swigging Juncker is enough to remind me of how bureaucracy benefits from the benefits it receives – of course they want to protect their lifestyle and pension pots . It is time we established our own priorities .

  16. Antisthenes
    September 22, 2016

    Impatience with the slow pace of Brexit is understandable but it is not rational. Brexit has to be right and rushing is not the answer as the gains from doing so may be outweighed by the losses. The EU treaties have damned us all with their complexity, the obligations that they impose and the fact that they have been written so as to give all the advantage to the bureaucrats of Brussels and their overloads the EU presidents who are not disposed to treating the UK fairly.

    David Davis, Liam Fox and Boris have a mammoth task in finding an equitable way to accomplish Brexit. They are being sniped at by all side. Remainers and Brussels doing everything they can to undermine the process. Leavers not able to agree when and how Brexit should be triggered and what the outcome of negotiations should look like. A prime minister who may or may not be up to the job of ensuring Brexit actually takes place considering the immense difficulty in achieving it in a way that enough are content with the result so that it does not result in her and the countries downfall.

    Short of a world war I do not believe the UK has been in such a difficult situation. The idea of just walking away and telling the EU to do it’s worst as we have the better bargaining chips and the least to lose is an attractive one. However that may not have the outcome that we suppose as scorning bullies that abide in abundance in Brussels and fears real or imagined that Brexit stirs in the minds of many EU member states leaders could be very dangerous if all are not placated in some way. A tall order as that may mean giving concessions that does not help Brexit one bit. Brexit has opened Pandora’s box. Fortunately we Brits are famous for muddling through and winning out in the end but we never do it quickly and without casualties.

  17. Liz
    September 22, 2016

    I suspect things are on hold until after the party conference.
    The airwaves are still full of the voices of remainers, which includes nearly all political commentators, -doing their utmost to find ways round the referendum result and talk down life outside the EU and hardly mentioning the problems of the Euro and youth unemployment inside it.

    1. Denis Cooper
      September 22, 2016

      Things are on hold until the Supreme Court delivers its verdict.

    2. Jerry
      September 22, 2016

      @Liz; “The airwaves are still full of the voices of remainers”

      What have the airwaves, or even the printed MSM have to do with the silence from Brexiteers (other than our host), elections etc. are now being won or lost on the internet and other social media. Brexiteers went silent from about 5am on the morning of the 24th June, even after catching up on sleep there were few Brexiteers to be heard, because they haven’t the first clue what should be done because they never expected to win.

      Just look how quickly Mr Brexit himself, no not BoJo, Mr Farage, bowed out, and now off to cut another farrow in the ground (swell of opinion) were he can choose what he wants say rather than trying to explaining the necessary processes of Brexit and why we might not be able to do as he (and others) have pledged before and during the referenda campaign.

      1. stred
        September 23, 2016

        Nigel Farage has in fact said on a number of occasions that he wishes to follow the Redwood and Lilley line of declaring exit as soon as possible through A50 and not seeking membership of the single market but putting the ball in the EU court with a promise not to impose tariffs if they don’t.

        It is the Remain politicians and organisations which keep fannying about, finding endless reasons for delay and possible dangers from a vindictive EU.

        1. Jerry
          September 23, 2016

          @stred: Sorry but many Brexiteers politicos [1] are simply not willing to answer the difficult ‘ifs and buts’ questions, thus those who never wanted Brexit are being left to answer/fend off such questions -then other Brexiteers, such as in comments on this site, denounce the Remainers for “fannying about”!

          For someone who wanted the public to believe he had all the answers before the referenda, and wasn’t shy about shouting from the roof tops either, Mr Farage has been the proverbial dormouse – hardly a squeak since, other than the big set piece Valedictory address last Saturday (and the usual personal abuse delivered in the EP, which again was a set piece).

          [1] our host is an exception whilst those taken into Cabinet have an excuse, both having to get up to speed not just on the ifs and buts of actual Brexit (never mind their whole Brief beyond the EU) and also having to be mindful of diplomatic niceties -Mr Farage might get away with being rude to senior eurocrats etc. but then he is not negotiating our exit terms, thankfully (in my opinion)…

  18. Iain Gill
    September 22, 2016

    Could ask the same about a lot of things…

    Why are we paying for an NHS dental service when many of us cannot access one in practise, just rang around all the dentists in town and none of them will see me as an NHS patient only as a private patient… regardless of whether or not they are supposedly NHS dentists

    They appear to keep their NHS status just in case the feel like being charitable now and again and seeing a young child with parents who cannot afford private, or something similar

    Just pull the plug on the whole mess if I am going to have to pay to go private all the time I may as well not be taxed the amount needed to fund the laughable NHS dental service


    Free at the point of no service whatsoever

    1. Jerry
      September 22, 2016

      @Ian Gill, “Just pull the plug on the whole mess if I am going to have to pay to go private all the time I may as well not be taxed the amount needed to fund the laughable NHS dental service”

      But that is the point, if people like you would just stop taking the ‘free market’ approach all the ruddy time! Why not fund the NHS properly, thus you’ll be able to get an appointment. This is not even about waiting lists as even those who pay to go private still often have to wait, and almost all NHS dentists will do their up most see someone who is pain. What is more, just as in the USA, you will still have to pay your taxes, a surcharge on your private practice bill or health insurance premium towards funding something akin to Medicare because otherwise how does the state support the unemployed and others on low or no incomes so they can obtain treatment (means-tested or not) – or perhaps you think such people should be left in pain?…

    2. forthurst
      September 22, 2016

      “[The dentists] appear to keep their NHS status just in case the feel like being charitable”

      …or, indeed, if they might wish for a NHS Pension Scheme payout in the future.

      1. stred
        September 23, 2016

        Those NHS dentists, most of which operate as private practicioners, sit on panels, deciding whether any new dentist practises are ‘needed’ and are allowed to open in their NHS district. Nor surprisingly, dentists wishing to open their own NHS surgery, instead of paying half their income to the established surgeries as employees, have a very difficult obstacle to overcome.

        The system is a stitch up and they have their placemen right to the top.

  19. oldtimer
    September 22, 2016

    The state of the public finances is a reminder of the financial irresponsibility of successive governments that have overseen the inexorable rise of the national debt. The opposition parties remain fully committed to piling on more taxes – their leaders are applauded by their supporters when they proclaim their intentions at party conferences. The last Conservative PM and Chancellor paid lip service to getting taxes and the national debt down but actually put up both taxes and the national debt. So long as the political class continues to believe in and to take the drug that more public spending is the answer to everything then the national debt and taxes will continue to rise. I have no great hopes that the new PM and Chancellor will be any different.

  20. Denis Cooper
    September 22, 2016

    As an aside, I would recommend perusal of the evidence that two witnesses, Professor John Manners-Bell and Dr Christos Tsinopoulos, recently gave to a Lords committee:

    I am not going to copy and paste extensively, but essentially what they had to say about the prospects for a new trade agreement with the EU is quite reassuring, provided that the other countries want the present trade to continue uninterrupted and unimpeded.

    From the professor:

    “I may have a rosier and more confident picture than many, but as to where we are in forging a new relationship with the EU, we already have everything in place when it comes to customs procedures and harmonisation and standardisation for products. I see negotiations probably being a lot easier, if the will exists, than many people think.”

    That’s “if the will exists”; which actually echoes the statement by a Norwegian witness at an earlier session:

    “We have learned that you have to put an emphasis on political will and then there are some legal elements, and these things have to be balanced. In general, if there is political will and commitment from the parties, it is possible to find all kinds of solutions.”

    In this case the “political will” of the UK government has to be to effect a complete separation of trade and immigration; and if anybody hopes that can be achieved while remaining in the EEA they should read the preamble to the EEA Agreement:

    “DETERMINED to provide for the fullest possible realization of the free movement of goods, persons, services and capital within the whole European Economic Area … “

  21. Kevin
    September 22, 2016

    The immediate cancellation of our contributions has been raised because, as JR put it in a recent post:
    “If we rightly do not go to conferences like Bratislava why do we help pay the bills?”

    I am not a lawyer but I believe, morally at least, that the above question may bear some relation to the maxim, “he who comes into equity must come with clean hands. That is, if our (former) E.U. partners – of whom, by the way, we seem always willing to believe the worst – were to continue to demand our contributions then they must allow us the continued exercise of our full rights under the same agreement.

  22. acorn
    September 22, 2016

    BTW. JR is quoting from for August. This bulletin is well worth a read.

    Also, there is an interesting bit (for number crunchers) in the DMO Review. Look at the “Gilts and Treasury Bill Holdings”.

    Overseas holders have got £462 billion of UK government savings certificates. That means the Treasury is paying out to foreigners, £266 million a week in interest, to people who are not likely to spend it back into the UK domestic economy. That is a bit more than the net £215 million a week, we are paying in EU club fees.

    There is no reason for the UK Treasury, to be paying welfare payments to foreigners. It is just the same as the DWP making welfare payments to our own citizens.

  23. Pete Stroud
    September 22, 2016

    Unfortunately we really cannot renege on our pledge to pay our dues to the wretched EU, until we negotiate conditions for leaving.

  24. alan jutson
    September 22, 2016

    Yes 6 years after the promise to balance the books, we have now virtually doubled the debt and its still growing.

    Aware that these things cannot be resolved overnight, but we seem just to be coasting further and further into more and more debt, with little or no action or control.
    Something has to change, someone has to grasp the nettle, the longer we leave it the harder it will get.

    Agree we should write that letter without any further delay, we are now being excluded from EU meetings on policy etc, so what is the point in hanging on and paying in more money.

    We voted LEAVE, just LEAVE, and then negotiate trade and co-operation like any other Non member Country.
    If they want/insist on the free movement of people, just walk away.

    If they want to impose trade tariffs then we simply reciprocate.

    Time to consider ourselves first for a change.

  25. Denis Cooper
    September 22, 2016

    Even I find this hard to believe.

    “A shell-shocked Cameron did not need convincing. He’d planned to stay put until 2019, before handing over the reins — he hoped — to George Osborne.

    But the prospect of having to handle the political, economic and diplomatic fallout from Brexit was more than he could bear.

    ‘Why should I have to deal with the hard s*** for someone else, just to hand it over to them on a plate?’ he exclaimed.”

  26. Richard Butler
    September 22, 2016

    Apologies for another post, but this is important! Don’t feel the need to publish this one.

    John, I wondered whether the Govt is aware that tech companies are apparently leaving our sores for the EU?
    Business needs clarity asap to stem the flow.

  27. ian
    September 22, 2016

    All spin, just buying your own growth at 7 to 1 and more leverage with more cuts to services on top, down my way schools have to cut teacher hours, increase class size, no money for books and equipment, i see that manchester talking about cutting the fire service altogether with other things to pay for devolution, they shovel out billions to big business and as john points out get back 5% corporation tax 4% income tax with most of the workers coming from overseas to keep the wage bill down and what the workers can save is sent back home, care homes shutting down and bin collection going to once a month and other things as councils cut back as the parliament cuts them.

    1. fedupsoutherner
      September 22, 2016

      Ian, it is being reported today that Sturgeon has given £12m of taxpayers money to the Scottish open golf competition including money for prize money which she will personally give to the winner. Of course she will enjoy a type of royal hospitality which she thinks she so deserves but all the time she moans about austerity and not enough money from Westminster while the SNP spend millions of our money on T in the Park and golf competitions. You couldn’t make it up.

  28. Sir Joe Soap
    September 22, 2016

    The UK knows how to tax enterprise and effort
    No, the UK didn’t Vote Remain and neither does it tax enterprise and effort.

    LibLabCon knows how to tax enterprise and effort

    1. Sir Joe Soap
      September 22, 2016

      I think you have been told many times that the established parties are on their own side, which isn’t the side of the UK.

  29. Mick
    September 22, 2016

    How much longer are we going to help pay for the EU?
    Until you and your fellow MP’s start putting pressure on Mrs May to invoke article 50, unlike yourself Mr Redwood the man on the street doesn’t have access to talk bluntly to Mrs May, surly she must read the papers or watch the news and have a feeling what we want and now, and not as it seems to be getting kicked into the long grass

  30. Chris S
    September 22, 2016

    I don’t think it wise to break any of our treaty obligations prior to leaving which means continuing with our contributions until the date we set for us to leave.

    However I believe we need to take the lead in negotiations and Mrs May should trigger Article 50 the day after she has seen off the ludicrous last ditch legal challenges put up by increasingly desperate Remainers.

    I would then give Brussels 12 months notice that we will be leaving and will be stopping making budget contributions after that period. If Brussels drags its feet beyond 12 months our contributions will cease then anyway.

    We should tell them that we are initially adopting all EU rules into domestic legislation and will review them at our leisure. We will understand if the 27 cannot get their act together within the notice period so we will expect them to continue with free trade as at present until an agreement is reached.

    As we are committed to ending FOM, this will end after the 12 months, irrespective.

    We expect the first section of our new relationship, namely the reciprocal rights of existing residents, to be agreed within the first three months. We will propose no change to the status of any EU citizen currently living in a member state other than their own and a continuation of Visa-free travel for all EU and UK passport holders.

    Finally, everyone renewing their UK passport from January 2017 should receive one with a removable burgundy outer cover with a fixed, Navy Blue UK Passport cover underneath.the outer cover can be ceremonially ripped off on Brexit Day which, from then on, should become a National Holiday. To be known as Trafalgar Day, Perhaps ?

    September 22, 2016

    Off Topic:
    So , in a previous comment I related ad nauseam my purchase of a cheapo printer. It appeared to have every single part manufactured in disparate areas of the world. There seemed to be a mickey-mouse product insurance if one were lucky enough to live in the Republic of Ireland and have the printer actually break-down in that beautiful emerald isle.
    Well, the Vietnamese printed instructions, the Brazilian A4 paper, the Japanese printing machine and the Irish insurance have been coupled to my US computer via a Chinese USB five metre cable which was brought to me by the UK Post Office. Result: Excellent. It printed wonderfully my meditations which are an updated version of those of Marcus Aurelius but far more entertaining and, British.
    # The quality of printing and speed and especially reliability was far greater than those of a large financial company in UK via their printer and laptop.
    There is much wrong in our financial companies. “If it works don’t fix it”. They don’t work.

  32. Prigger
    September 22, 2016

    The BBC for which, singularly, we are fined for having their services by way of an annual licence fee, report on Charlotte—— largely foregoing the un-sensational fact that the police officer firing the shot and killing the black “victim” is himself black and, the Head of Police is also black.
    We really must stop financing the BBC.

  33. ian
    September 22, 2016

    The story today in DM about calais aid workers,i was wondering why so many women march with placards saying let the refugees in, now i know.

  34. BobE
    September 22, 2016

    Im just pleased that we still have UKIP

  35. ian
    September 22, 2016

    Cut in interest rates and more QE with money available to the banks 250 billion pounds and choirs of how well the people and the country are doing and then another wave off cuts hit you, all this would of been done even if you had voted to stay in europe.
    There is no end to the lies, it is also a lie that central banks control interest rates, they dont the market does they just follow.
    Eights years on and still they can get past 2% growth which they manufacture themselves and you had mandate inflation of two percent that no growth.

  36. adam
    September 22, 2016

    Why does the BBC never focus on what is happenning in the world unless it is nato UN propaganda.

    All the crime and poverty and suffering of the third world is ignored now that the have overthrown the imperialists. Why arent the people there being held to account by the Biased Broadscasting Corp. Why arent the conditions which cause the refugees being examined and reported on.

  37. Denis Cooper
    September 22, 2016

    They are getting there at last:

    “Chuka Umunna: We Should Be Prepared To Sacrifice Single Market Membership To Axe Freedom Of Movement”

    “If continuation of the free movement we have is the price of Single Market membership then clearly we couldn’t remain in the Single Market, but we are not at that point yet.”

    From what is coming across the Channel we are at that point and have been for a long time and it is very unlikely that they will drop their irrational obsession with linking trade and immigration.

  38. James Munroe
    September 22, 2016

    Nice to see BBC correspondents looking like they were “chewing wasps”, while reporting their grudgingly good news, on the post-Brexit economic situation.

    But, as always, plenty of BBC caveats…”at present”…”so far”…OECD suggesting problems next year…spin good news into “you just wait – it will all go wrong eventually”.

    1. fedupsoutherner
      September 22, 2016

      James, yes I think they are hoping for a global recession which will affect our economy and then they can say they were right all along. It wont’ matter why our economy worsens, it will always be about Brexit.

  39. Mark
    September 22, 2016

    Unsurprisingly the CML has announced another bumper month of mortgage lending – up 15% on a year ago – in response to the Bank of England’s actions. Clearly Mr Carney still believes in Mr Osborne’s property bubble.

  40. Ronald Olden
    September 22, 2016

    The interesting thing about this is how Corporation Tax Receipts have rocketed since we started cutting the CT Rate in earnest in 2010.

    If from next April we cut the Corporation Tax Rate we charge trading companies to the 12.5% that prevails in Ireland, and announced that it will fall to 10% immediately we Leave the EU (12.5% is the lowest rate the EU allows), we would be swamped with inward investment and Companies relocating their Head Offices here.

    Corporation Tax Receipts would rise into the stratosphere.

  41. Lindsay McDougall
    September 23, 2016

    “State debt stood at £1621 bn. More realistically it is around £1200 bn when you take off the large amounts of debt the state now has bought up, and the planned increased purchases over the next few months.”

    The State cannot buy up its own debt. What a crazy notion. It can only temporarily rig the money markets via QE; the result will be inflation.

    One of the topics that historians and economists have not investigated is what happened to the original £375 billion of QE. Some say the banks bought into assets in the BRICS countries, thus raising asset prices there. Others say that some of the QE was added to the balance sheets of potential zombie banks to make them appear solvent. Is RBS a zombie bank or is it not? It hasn’t make a net profit for 7 years and the Chancellor has not found an opportune moment to sell off the shares held by the nation.

  42. ian
    September 24, 2016

    Well fedupsouthern wait till you have to bail out her parliament 30 billion pounds or more because your parliament not going to stop her parliament from wasting money and at end of the day you will pick up the bill.

  43. japanne
    September 26, 2016

    I still cannot believe Mr Cameron never had an exit / handover contingency plan in place, the work that should have been done in the lead up to the referendum is actually being done now. Surely he should have been held accountable for his complacency in thinking “I did not think it would happen” Its almost like a really bad change programme with no follow-through and realisation of the consequences.

    I think the longer we avoid triggering Article.50 momentum will be lost, the worst everything will get. Expecting more poorer countries from the eastern bloc to be granted membership, this will mean any controls over ‘free movement’ will be weakened because the influx of low-skilled / unskilled unemployed people would by then have emigrated to UK, so the curbing of flow would make no difference. More people will have a huge impact on an already saturated job market, more people to add to the state pension scheme, and haemorrhaging NHS.

    Longer we keep paying into EU, the less emphasis is put on the importance and the reason why we voted to leave. Worst case scenario ‘stay because we’ve run out of options, its too difficult’. Goal post keeps moving, it seems everytime something is suggested EU comes back with answers that seem to be recently thought up. Why can’t each side outline their requirements and work through them, looking from the outside in, its like we’re being indecisive, guessing the next steps and never agreeing.

    Why is everything so difficult to roll-back to a state where Brussels legislation directives came into effect (ie passporting ‘1993) its the reason why MiFID II was developed to work with investment assets & financial institutions.

    Eurozone is crashing and being proped up by central banks, and most european countries heading towards economic slow-down. QE & austerity is not the long-term solution, it would be better if UK was detached from this and focus on WTO.

Comments are closed.