Sam_Brown wrote: ↑
Tue Jun 04, 2019 8:29 am
Yeah very true. Apparently we’re not going to pay it according to some of the leavers. I need to remember that one the next time I want to leave my phone contract early.
We don't pay the negotiated settlement if we leave without a deal.
Let's be quite clear, there were lies, misleadings and deceptions on both sides of the campaign, as there are in all democratic votes. Barack Obama said that we would be at the back of the queue for a trade deal with the US if we left, full in the knowledge that he wouldn't be making that decision. Why did he say that? I can only assume it was because David Cameron asked him to, because he thought it would influence people into voting to stay.
Your job, as a rational voting adult, is to pick your way through the minefield, see which bits you believe, which bits you don't, and make your choice accordingly.
Let's also be quite clear about another thing. Sam, the deal you wanted was most certainly possible, and the only reason we don't have it is because our politicians have royally cocked-up in the negotiations. And the reason for that is that our parliament have been squinnying about not leaving without a deal, therefore tying one arm behind the negotiators' backs. The one thing that the EU feared most about us leaving is the prospect of a no-deal, and there are 39 billion reasons for that.
"Here we are, M. Barnier, we'd like a deal please, rest assured, we won't leave without one, but we'd like as good a deal as possible, pretty please." - why on Earth do we think we'd get a good deal under those circumstances?
Swap that scenario for "Good morning M. Barnier, this is what we would ideally like, this is what we won't compromise on, anything in-between is acceptable to us, but if we don't get that, you don't get your €39Bn. What're you gonna do?" That's what we should have been saying, and I feel certain that they would have been more generous, shall we say.