Dont think the Withdrawal Agreement would just cost £39 bn

Most of us in the debate have accepted the Treasury estimate of the costs of the Withdrawal Agreement. However, there are no figures in the Agreement and certainly no cash limits on what we would have to pay. The readiness of the Remain establishment to use the £39 bn figure should be cause for concern. The out turn could be a lot higher.

The language is vague over how the sums will be calculated but tight and binding over our need to pay up. Under the Agreement the EU will set out how much it thinks we owe, and we have little power to push back and reduce it. No normal business or individual entering a contract would accept such an open ended and one sided arrangement. They will simply notify us of the bill, and charge us interest if we do not pay on time.

The pathetically weak Uk negotiation even lost out badly over the European Investment Bank. As they want us out of it we should be repaid our capital and share of the accumulated reserves, At some point we gave up our rights to the reserves and would get our starting capital back on its own over an eleven year period. Meanwhile we remain on risk for our full starting proportion of uncalled capital. The accumulated profits and reserves are more than twice the called capital. so we get back under one third of what we are owed. There’s a great one sided deal for the EU.

The EU told us the Withdrawal Agreement could not look forwards and tackle the future partnership, though it does where it suits them as over names of products from geographical areas. It also looks a long way forwards over money, requiring us to pay pensions for decades, to meet spending not yet committed and to meet benefit and public service charges for people not yet arrived here.

The UK is of course liable for full budget years 2019 and 2020 owing to effectively remaining in the EU without our vote and voice for the so called transition. We will pay our full share of own resources taxation and will continue to be liable after December 2020 for any money extra they wish to charge us. We will also be held liable for shares of commitments outstanding on December 31 2020 for payments to be made after we have left. and in the second year after we have left and beyond. There will be an attempt to have a final reckoning after 2028, though things like pensions payments go on long after that.

In other words the Treasury has effectively given them a series of blank cheques for a decade to come, without any apparent push back or argument over these huge and unspecified amounts. There are no figures in the main text of the Agreement to give the EU maximum flexibility to send us some big bills. What did the UK government think it was doing when it agreed to this?


  1. Andy
    December 9, 2018

    It is true. The cost of your Brexit is well beyond £39bn.

    That is just the ‘upfront fee’ for the Leave deception. Fewer doctors and nurses to treat you when you get sick, less money for your grandchildren’s schools, lower investment in roads and railways, worse social care for you in your old age. That is what your Brexit bill means.

    Your children and grandchildren will be paying off the balance of your debt for the rest of their lives too as your Brexit will make them permanently comparably poorer.

    Many of you claim to be concerned about taxes – particularly inheritance tax.

    And yet you are more than happy to lumber subsequent generations with the burden of paying for your Brexit – a Brexit they overwhelmingly do not want.

    My mother voted for Brexit. I make her feel guilty when, in her presence, I outline to my children – her grandchildren – the things she has voted to take away from them. My daughter is old enough now to understand.

    And I know why mum voted for Brexit. It was not sovereignty. It was immigration. And, when you delve beyond the superficial, it was not the immigration of white, Christian EU citizens that concerned her either. We will see this ugly side of Brexit on the streets of London today when UKIP’s move well beyond the boundary of acceptable politics is complete.

    This is what your Brexit has done.

    Reply Nonsense. The cost of staying in as you wish to would also b e much higher!

    1. matthu
      December 9, 2018

      You emulate the EU. I am sure your mother longs to see you and be near you and care for you, when you do your best to fill her with feelings of guilt. Do you find guilt is a wonderful motivator for your children too? I wouldn’t be surprised if social services is onto you by now, but surely your children will want to be leavinf home as soon as they possibly can – and I wouldn’t blame them.

      1. Hope
        December 9, 2018

        JR, it is far worse. May has agreed to pay for military initiatives over which we have no say, read Dearlove and former army general who are vehemently opposed to finding away our military and security to the EU.

        EDF, EU overseas aid, will be paid for an unknown time, the other EDF, military spending, is for military expenses and procurement.

        It is incredible she says that the UK has legal responsibilities! She carried on signing military pacts after the referendum! In stark contrast says taking back control of our money whine she does not know what the demand might be but has,agreed to pay whatever it is! She is a serial liar. Then we have May’s dishonest Kitkat policy to hide true costs and ties in principles so we will not,know the true amount until the demand falls on the mat! Our taxes for nothing!

        1. Hope
          December 9, 2018

          JR, I have written here numerous times how Davis replied to Patel in parliament that the estimate of £39 billion was after deducting U.K. assets. This alone takes the bribe to £100 billion not the mooted £39 to quell concerns and deceive the public. What was Davis thinking? He always said think of the bigger prize, look at the draft declaration and ask, is that it! Nevertheless there is still talk that the UK will be liable for bailouts! Is this correct?

          Cameron lied last time, he gave our money away and loaned Ireland £7 billion. So much for helping this so called close friend.

    2. matthu
      December 9, 2018

      You emulate the EU.

      I am sure your mother longs to see you and be near you and care for you, when you do your best to fill her with feelings of guilt. Do you find guilt is a wonderful motivator for your children too? I wouldn’t be surprised if social services is onto you by now, but surely your children will want to be leavinf home as soon as they possibly can – and I wouldn’t blame them.

    3. Maybot
      December 9, 2018

      Doubtless the violence at the UKIP demonstration today will be because of an attack by Remain militants.

      The People’s Vote march went unmolested by Leavers.

      Remainers can talk uninterrupted on TV by Leavers (not visa versa though)

      Leavers cannot even have this site without Remainers coming on it and abusing us like you are doing now, Andy.

      1. Steve
        December 9, 2018


        “Doubtless the violence at the UKIP demonstration today will be because of an attack by Remain militants.”

        Nah, remainers are essentially liberal snowflakes, who by their very nature would run like hell from a fight.

    4. Anonymous
      December 9, 2018

      5.36am posting

      This is not the habit of a mid forties man with a young family. I know I certainly had better things to do on a Sunday.

    5. Sir Joe Soap
      December 9, 2018

      You don’t seem to be very nice to your family, or anybody else!

    6. Dave Andrews
      December 9, 2018

      This is not JRs Brexit, nor mine either. I rather like Michael Howard’s idea he voiced yesterday. Challenge the EU to implement frictionless trade after 29th March with a skeleton deal whilst working on a long term agreement.
      No money need change hands, and all the issues you raise evaporate.

    7. Glenn Vaughan
      December 9, 2018

      “My mother voted for Brexit. I make her feel guilty….” Andy.

      My disgust and contempt for the attitudes you display on this website remain undiminished – ugh!

      1. Mitchel
        December 10, 2018

        Displaying those Pavel Morozov tendencies,Andy would have been awarded a medal of honour in the Soviet Union.

    8. Colin
      December 9, 2018

      “My mother voted for Brexit. I make her feel guilty when, in her presence, I outline to my children – her grandchildren – the things she has voted to take away from them. “

      Remarkably, you appear to be proud of this appalling behaviour.

    9. L Jones
      December 10, 2018

      You’re a silly billy, Andy. I’m sure you are not as revered in your family as you obviously think you are. I imagine they laugh at you behind your back. ”Poor Andy, what’s he like?”

  2. Stred
    December 9, 2018

    This is what Mr Cox told MPs in the recent statement. The most amazing piece of his information was that the UK had no obligation to pay anything under EU law, but we had decided to pay up front because we thought that we could be challenged under British! law. Why, if this is true, don’t we do, a Trump suggested, let them sue for it. Who would ever, to use the AG’s analogy, expect to pay the bar bill for years after we have left the club. The club should trim its bay bill after it’s biggest member has left, not order enough booze for a giant piss up lasting seven years.

    1. Lifelogic
      December 9, 2018

      Indeed and what about our fair share of the assets we have already contributed too? These needs to be offset. Pensions too are a liability incurred at the time of employment and should already have be provided for by the club at the time. What an appalling mess the dreadful Heath, Major, Blair, Brown, Cameron, May and even Thatcher made by embedding us dearly in this socialist anti-democratic disaster.

  3. Stred
    December 9, 2018

    This is what Mr Cox told MPs in the recent statement. The most amazing piece of his information was that the UK had no obligation to pay anything under EU law, but we had decided to pay up front because we thought that we could be challenged under British! law. Why, if this is true, don’t we do, as Trump suggested, let them sue for it. Who would ever, to use the AG’s analogy, expect to pay the bar bill for years after we have left the club. The club should trim its bay bill after it’s biggest member has left, not order enough booze for a giant piss up lasting seven years.

  4. Peter Wood
    December 9, 2018

    Good Morning,

    The incompetence of this proposal beggars belief, however Dr. Redwood may have found out why we have all be focused on the Irish Backstop; that is a miss-direct only, that can easily resolved by a surprisingly successful revisit to Brussels by the PM.

    The EU is ONLY interested in the money. Mrs. May wants us to continue to prop up that moribund and profligate organisation. Why?

    1. Peter
      December 9, 2018

      ‘What did the UK government think it was doing when it agreed to this?’

      It thought it was effectively remaining in the EU while hoping to appear as though we had left. BRINO.

      Thus fulfilling the wish of a Remain parliament, rather than the result of the 2016 vote.

    2. old salt
      December 9, 2018

      Peter Wood – It isn’t just the money it’s their subjugating control over us we wanted back.

  5. oldtimer
    December 9, 2018

    Thank you for drawing attention to the uncertain financial implications of the WA. Mrs May says we will be in “uncharted waters” if her WA is rejected by MPs. It is obvious that the real, legally binding, uncharted waters are set out in the WA. The more of it that is understood and analysed the worse it gets. No wonder she tried to bounce the cabinet into it at Chequers and MPs now. The WA is the real Project Fear not the no deal alternative.

  6. jasonW
    December 9, 2018

    Exactly John, and for this reason we should just cancel A50 and just stay where we are- save the 39billion.

    The peoples decision from the June 2016 Referendum will still stand and we can leave at some future time when we are better prepared and know where we are going because right now there is so much confusion and conflict that to leave even to WTO rules without a clear plan for future trade would be not very wise, in fact it could be a sorry leap into the dark.

    Here’s the thing, there are lot’s of people because of there own personal circumstance will not be affected if we leave 29 March with no deal, people with government payments salaries and business people, just like JR here or Tim Martin with his pubs, but there are others who’s whole life and well being depends very much of having free uninterrupted access to the EU markets, JIT even. So we really have to try to think of others as well.

    Reply Untrue. Leaving on 29 March is crucial for our democracy and to get our money b ack

    1. Mark B
      December 9, 2018


      We had over TWO YEARS to get this right. What makes you think another TWO or TWENTY TWO YEARS is going to make anything better ? The government is pro-EU and pro-Remain. End of !

      On 29th March 2019 we Leave. I voted Leave even though I knew I would be personally affected by the decision. I did it because I saw what the EU is and do not want any part of it.

      1. Timaction
        December 9, 2018

        Indeed. There has been no negotiation as May, Ollie and their team have been on the same side as the EU. She had no mandate for signing our military up to the EU or aligning us to goods and agricultural products with no say. The other alignment issues means BRINO and a slap in the face to 17.5 million Brits. She should be toast this week or the Tory’s will never be in Government again.
        Sir Nigel forming new Party this week!

    2. Sir Joe Soap
      December 9, 2018

      Business needs to adapt to changing circumstances.

      Business serves the people, the people don’t serve business.
      Banks serve people, people don’t serve banks.
      Government serves people, people don’t serve government.

      Have you visited Paris lately?

    3. Dave Andrews
      December 9, 2018

      We shouldn’t need to pay for uninterrupted access to the EU markets when we offer the same to the EU with no charge. Particularly when they sell more to us than we do to them. They lose more from trade barriers. The UK people know this, EU citizens know this, just the Commission don’t care because they want to protect the big Project.

    4. Jagman84
      December 9, 2018

      Staying in the EU (on the current rotten terms) is no longer on offer. Full participation and a Federal Europe is what faces us, if we were to attempt to call it all off. They would have us over a barrel with both that and the WA. Leaving, without an unnecessary exit deal, is the only sensible way forward. Trade will sort itself out, if Government gets out of the way.

  7. Renton
    December 9, 2018

    You are profoundly confused. We are leaving the EU, as you keep saying, and we are leaving the European Investment Bank. That is the UK’s choice – but of course we don’t get our capital back. Which bit of “leaving” don’t you understand, Mr Redwood? If you resigned from Wokingham Bridge Club would you expect to get a share of the assets as a goodbye present? No. You’re leaving. Off you go. Same with the UK leaving the EU – UK’s choice. And perhaps one day you be honest enough to tell people just how much we are losing as a result – the catastrophic loss of access to the European Investment bank is a good place to start

    Reply What an unpleasant and silly response. The whole point is the UK decided, I think wrongly, to enter a negotiation over how much money we owed them, so in such a negotiation you also argue over how much they owe us. I of course favour just leaving and paying them nothing.

    1. Richard1
      December 9, 2018

      I don’t know whether you’ve ever invested in shares in a business, either public or private? Can you imagine circs where you’d have signed an investment agreement allowing those shares simply to be confiscated and 1/3 of the market value drip fed back to you over many years? The arrangements over the EIB on their own are enough to vote down Mrs May’s terrible agreement. Why on earth has Hammond agreed to this he’s supposed at least to have a business brain?!

      1. acorn
        December 9, 2018

        The UK’s called up capital in EIB is £3.5 billion. EIB’s current Tier 1 and 2 capital attributable (16%) to the UK is circa £8.8 billion. The EIB has loaned about £38 billion to UK projects since 2010. If the EU lets us, we should stay in the EIB, it’s a nice little earner.

        1. Richard1
          December 9, 2018

          I agree with that. JR says they want us out though and that May has agreed an absurd value destructive exit

    2. Sir Joe Soap
      December 9, 2018

      Easy then, no capital back, no payments.

  8. eeyore
    December 9, 2018

    If JR is planning a further contribution to the debate this coming week I hope he will highlight these horrors. When the wider public hears about them its roar of rage will shake Westminster to the cellars.

    This is, I think, one of our host’s most important posts ever on Brexit. It should go viral, and be spread by every means possible.

    Reply I am not allowed to speak twice in the 5 day Parliament debate, but am continuing to contribute to the debate here and want these views to be widely circulated

    1. Jagman84
      December 9, 2018

      Mr Redwood. Is it permissible for you to ask another member to give way, so as to impart these pertinent facts into the debate. It appeared to be OK with Mr Speaker, when the right honourable member for Uxbridge & South Ruislip was addressing the chamber.

      Reply Yes you can intervene

  9. Bob Dixon
    December 9, 2018

    I have instructed my MP ,Jonathan Djogley ,to vote down The Withdrawl Agreement. In addition he must press our Prime Minister to advise The EU that we are leaving on the 29/3/2019 without a deal. Ministers must use the remains time to plan our leaving.

  10. John Sheridan
    December 9, 2018

    It thought that if the full extent of the one-sided deal was revealed, the public would not support it. It’s not just the backstop which makes May’s Withdrawal Agreement a bad deal, it’s thoroughly flawed.

    The problem is that the majority of the Conservative MPs support May’s deal. Whilst, with their support, she remains in charge of the negotiations, the situation will not improve.

  11. Nigl
    December 9, 2018

    Get ready for her to rush off to Brussels and do a Cameron, coming back trying to sell nothing.

    1. Lifelogic
      December 9, 2018

      Indeed she will doubtless find some worthless drivel but the deal is so very far from being remotely acceptable.

    2. Sir Joe Soap
      December 9, 2018

      Which will waste another month. She needs to go this week. New Year, new start, new team.

      1. Lifelogic
        December 9, 2018

        An early Christmas present for all the nation. I never want to see or hear from this silly, disingenuous, robotic, socialist, nasty go home immigrant van woman ever again. She keeps talking about “the national interest”, she would not recognise the national interest if it bit her on the nose.

    3. Jagman84
      December 9, 2018

      Her whole demeanour exudes weakness and incompetence. No wonder the EU commission took less than an hour to accept her surrender. I am amazed that they did not press for more concessions. I am sure that the well is far from dry!

    4. Oxiana321
      December 9, 2018

      ….and still the clock ticks. There is only so much that the PM can do with her remaining hours in office. The result is looking more like a new PM and no deal. I do not believe that the Conservative party would permit the current incumbent of No. 10 to stay on, risking the loss of DUP support and a possible election in 2019.

  12. Ron Olden
    December 9, 2018

    £39 Billion nor any other number, was never discussed. It all consists of a load of waffle and open ended commitments as described in the ‘Progress Report’ published on December 8th 2017 (See Below for URL).

    Starting at para 57 the Report says, that both Parties have arrived at a ‘methodology’ for calculating the financial settlement. No sum is agreed and even then, the Progress Report itself points out that even the ‘methodology’ IT IS NOT an agreement.

    Para 5 says :-. ”nothing is agreed until everything is agreed”.

    I don’t blame the EU for trying to get as much out of us as it can, but the the way this has been handled by our side is despicable.

    For a start, from what I can see, the payments are denominated in Euros. So the more uncertainty and panics the EU creates by obstructing an agreement acceptable to Parliament, the more Pounds it will get in its’ divorce settlement.

    I do however have some sympathy for us agreeing to pay our contributions and getting back what we normally would in terms of rebates and receipts, until the end of current EU budget period in 2020.

    It’s correct that there’s no legal obligation to make these payments, but we did sign up to the five year budget, and there’s arguably a debt of honour to discharge it.

    But in return for such goodwill be should be demanding goodwill back in the form of a deduction from the payments equal to our share of the EU’s net assets (allowing for accumulated liabilities to date), whereupon all liabilities from us and from them ceases.

    That’s EXACTLY how ‘divorce settlements’ and ‘company demergers’ are supposed to work!

    But this so called ‘divorce settlement’ is no such thing. It’s a scam to keep us financially liable for the EUs functioning, whilst getting nothing in return, or any say in what the EU spends the money on.

    The sensible way of achieving a proper ‘Orderly Brexit’ is by a ‘No Deal Blind Brexit’ which formally, and legally, ends Freedom of Movement, the Single Market, and the Customs Union on March 29th, but which creates the ‘transition period’ till the end of the budget period during which we and the EU abide voluntarily by the rules on the ground.

    If we had that, most of these Project Fear issues would subside, as it became increasing clear we can have mutual co-operation with the EU without being members of it.

    The issues of how the UK’s relationship with the Customs Union and the Single Market would then also feature and develop in our own Trade Agreement discussions with the rest of the World during the transition period, at the end of which, we, and the EU can continue any mutually beneficial elements of the Single Market and Customs Union, on a piecemeal basis, as appropriate, and for as long as it suits us.

  13. HenryS
    December 9, 2018

    Now Raab is out doing his stab in the back stuff..DD also..all out on manoeuvres. They deserve all the bad luck coming their way.

    Reply Anyone who resigned to oppose the PM is entitled to say what they wish and is certainly not stabbing in the back. Anyone who has stayed in the Cabinet and is asking for support to b e Leader is stabbing in the back.

    1. Mark B
      December 9, 2018


      The PM and Her Majesty’s Government ALL stood on a platform to take the UK out of the EU and ALL its institutions. This they are NOT doing. So who is stabbing who in the back now ?

      1. Lifelogic
        December 9, 2018

        Not doing – while blatantly lying that they are doing.

    2. Sir Joe Soap
      December 9, 2018

      And anyone who voted to give people their say in 2015 and took away that right in 2018 by voting for this deal is a hypocrite and acting undemocratically.

    3. Caterpillar
      December 9, 2018


      Even Paxman in the Mail bemoans the quality of many of today’s politicians.

      1. Lifelogic
        December 9, 2018

        All but a handful voted for the absurdly damaging and pointless Climate Change Act. So we can see they are nearly all very low in quality. But then would Paxman, a Catz English graduate (like Roger Harrabin the BBC’s climate alarmist in chief) also have approved of the climate change lunacy? etc ed.

        1. Lifelogic
          December 9, 2018

          And he worked for the BBC where it seems to be required that you have to be “a believer” in the Runaway Climate Armagedon and the “renewable” energy religions.

        2. Lifelogic
          December 9, 2018

          Paxman did at least try to hide his personal views though, until the current lot of lefty, greencrap pushing, pro EU, Newsnight presenters.

    4. Steve
      December 9, 2018


      “Anyone who resigned to oppose the PM is entitled to say what they wish”

      Really ?

      I was under the impression your logic was to censure factual comments about the PM. Unless of course you mean entitlement to say what one wishes only applies to MP’s.

      Yeah, another reason to vote you out mate !

  14. Kenneth
    December 9, 2018

    What did the UK government think it was doing when it agreed to this?


    It is disgusting.

    1. Steve
      December 9, 2018


      What UK government ? We don’t have one. Our’s is a quisling government.

  15. Mark B
    December 9, 2018

    Good morning.

    There has been no negotiations. I say again. No negotiations. The UK Government just handed the EU a blank piece of paper and told them to fill it in. The PM has no history of negotiating – PERIOD !!! So why was she allowed to do so ?

    The Withdrawal Agreement is a trap and the terms are so onerous as parliament must reject them. This would hand the decision back to parliament who might either reverse the decision or, place the UK in a situation of permanent extension.

    I saw today a woman handing out EU propaganda. Who is paying for this ?

  16. Bryan Harris
    December 9, 2018

    When is it going to be recognized by all concerned that the civil service and especially the Treasury has been actively working against us for years, not just in supporting a failed brexit, but in pushing socialism…. Time this swamp was cleaned out

  17. Alan Jutson
    December 9, 2018

    Thanks John for reminding those who may have forgotten about our financial give aways.

    You have posted on this before, but a long time ago, funnily enough never heard anything in the media about any of this financial surrender.

    Pray tell me what did we get for all of this money ?

    Clearly I must have been purchasing the wrong newspapers, or listening and viewing the wrong TV and Radio Channels.

  18. Steve
    December 9, 2018

    John Redwood is right, the only way this country can regain dignity after the humiliation brought about by Theresa May is to tell the EU what they can do with their deal, and just leave on March 29th regardless. Followed immediately by kicking Europe out of English and Scottish fishing areas.

    We save £39bn, and true to franco Belgian custom they will suddenly want to be our ‘friends’ again – guaranteed.

  19. Everhopeful
    December 9, 2018

    Is it true that Ted Heath was awarded the Charlemagne Prize (£35 k) after he signed the Treaty of Rome? In those days that was a heck of a lot of money.

    1. NigelE
      December 9, 2018

      About £440,000 according to the Bank of England’s calculator on the web.

      (Mind you, that’s a BoE figure. You may have doubts about its accuracy ….)

  20. Sir Joe Soap
    December 9, 2018

    Please be one of the team to get in there and sort this dreadful mess out!

    Just scan reading the WA I can see unquantified costs for access to databases etc. Basically the EU names their price and if we don’t pay we don’t get access to databases which we helped build! It is truly nuts and a dreadful deal.

    Clearly, a feature of Maybots is their failure at maths and accounting. They can trot out repeated inanities, but can’t base themselves in reason. Maybot Barclay in the Telegraph today is programmed similarly.

  21. Christine
    December 9, 2018

    On top of this money you need to add all the ‘off the books’ agreements she has committed us to and how the EU is looking to increase our contributions. Take the Erasmus program. Suddenly the EU increases the budget from 14.8 billion to 30 billion in their next round of spending. Is anyone asking the question regarding value for money for the UK taxpayer? Does she know only 0.5% of higher education students from the UK participate in this scheme? Is it just me or is she trying to find inventive ways to continue funding the EU via nefarious means? The whole thing stinks.

  22. Christine
    December 9, 2018

    It was interesting watching Hammond’s response to the Select Committee when asked about future trade deals signed by the EU. We would have to reduce our tariffs to the third country in line with the EU but the third country would not have to reduce any tariffs to us that they had agreed with the EU. This could decimate industries where we excel and the EU would be able to offer us up as a bargaining chip as part of their agreement. Hammond couldn’t answer this question. Just shows how little he knows about the agreement he wants us to sign.

  23. Denis Cooper
    December 9, 2018

    “What did the UK government think it was doing when it agreed to this?”

    On one level, the UK government thought that it was placating the Irish government and avoiding a possible return to terrorism. Remember those words of the Republic’s Europe Minister Helen McEntee on November 24th 2017:

    “We have been very very clear from day one, there cannot be a physical border and that means ruling out cameras, that means ruling out technology, that means ruling out anything that would imply a border on the island of Ireland, it is not an option for us”.”

    Which, incidentally, many months later seems to have finally sunk into the thick brains of some of the EFTA/EEA fanatics, which is why they have now started to say ‘Norway plus’ rather than just ‘Norway’ as before, but not yet having realised that the ‘plus’ part would be incompatible with membership of EFTA:

    But on another level the UK government thought it would be a clever wheeze to use the Irish border as a pretext for giving the CBI and others what they wanted:

    “… the woman from the CBI says that this is not a perfect deal but it would be far far worse to leave with no deal … if this deal is not a perfect deal from her point of view it is coming very close to that, as claimed in a CityAM article I first referenced months ago:

    “The private sector … has taken to the airwaves … and crammed into Whitehall meeting rooms to highlight threats … The Chequers deal is proof that the government has listened – it is as close to what we asked for as we were ever likely to get – and the Prime Minister has shown considerable fortitude in squaring the circles needed to deliver it. The rest of the government and all of Parliament now need to get behind it.”

  24. Denis Cooper
    December 9, 2018

    “The French authorities in Calais have no intention of imposing a go-slow on British vehicles, rightly calling it ‘economic suicide’. Deliberate delays would breach three treaties – the WTO treaty, the Trade Facilitation Agreement and the Lisbon Treaty, which requires the EU to behave in a neighbourly way towards adjacent states. Do pro-EU enthusiasts really think the EU would use illegal bullying to punish us? If so, how can they urge us to re-join this body?”

  25. William Long
    December 9, 2018

    The incompetence of the Treasury in all of this makes it more easy to understand how it continues to come up with the absurd forecasts it puts out on the effects of our keaving the EU. Perhaps Project Fear is not deliberate but just an accident??

  26. agricola
    December 9, 2018

    It does not stop there. Think of all the bureaucracy that industry is burdoned with in dealing with the EU. Then there is health and safety that has crept into the running of a village hall fete. Laudable on an oil rig or in a farm yard , but not every time we sneeze, get a life, accidents can happen even in the most professionally run organisations.

  27. Adam
    December 9, 2018

    Other than when a party causes damage to another, such as in bumping a motor car, costs for liability are not usually incurred unwillingly.

    People who are free make decisions about what they value, assess what is offered & at what price before committing to payment. Every product & service from a house to a haircut is processed for value vs competitive alternatives. Citizens tend to accept what their Govts incur as part of rough & tumble of being in the country of their choosing, & can elect better if they find the Govt they trusted has acted incompetently.

    Agreeing to pay the EU in advance of what its charge is for is equivalent to a blind lady offering her bank account authority to scammers on the internet, inviting them to take the amount they think fit. Mrs May appears not to see her own incompetence.

  28. nshgp
    December 9, 2018

    20,000 nurses per billion

    Austerity for the UK to pay for Junker’s incompetence.

    Junker heads up EIOPA, the European pensions and insurance regulator. Every month he signs off on his predictions of interest rates in 150 years time.

    He cannot be unaware of the regulations around pensions.

    But the EU runs a pension ponzi, breaking its own rules.

  29. ian
    December 9, 2018

    Like I keep saying, its a bailout of the EU if MPs put their hands up to sign Mrs May and cabinet deal or choose to stay in the EU, they have the opportunity to walk away and pay nothing but parliaments MPs and cabinet refuse to do it along with people who voted remain.
    It is a lot of taxes to pay just to able to walk around europe or work there, I would rather pay for a visa and fill in a few forms to work there, as for goods they will get through, whatever happens, that’s because somebody in europe has bought them.

  30. Helen Smith
    December 9, 2018

    Our host is sounding very angry now, 17.4m of us are very angry, I fear for this country if this deal goes through or we are forced to vote again.

  31. Jiminyjim
    December 9, 2018

    Mr Redwood, there are two visions of our future on this website. One expounded by Andy is a world where loved ones are berated, belittled and humiliated. This view portrays a view of the future which is uniformly negative and without hope. There is a second view, shared thankully by the vast majority on your site, where the future is glowing as long as we trust the good nature of our fellow citizens and stand fast to our own common sense and ability to decide things for ourselves, as we have done through the centuries. Andy, do you not see how people no longer want to view their own country, and those who disagree with them, in such a pessimistic and bullying way? The more you post here, Andy, the more I start to feel genuinely sorry for your apalling view of the future

    1. Fedupsoutherner
      December 9, 2018

      Well said jimmy

  32. Edwardm
    December 9, 2018

    This is consistent with Mrs May being a Remainer whose over-riding interest is the EU, and hence her audacious attempt to permanently subjugate us to the EU and make us pay for it and continue to be financially liable for it.
    Treason is not a strong enough word to describe Mrs May’s proposals.

  33. Dennis
    December 9, 2018

    Interesting that JR has done a U turn on the payment to the EU which he previously said we had nothing to pay. I noted on the Marr show today that Marr and Boris both agree that the UK must pay up.

    Reply I gave done no U turn and say we shoukd pay nothing after leaving in March 2019

Comments are closed.