Doh!

[tomtomagain]

UK to pay in to the EU for decades

whoops what did it say on the bus

Much better to settle liabilities over time as they come due than as a single up-front payment.

I don't see the problem with spreading the exit cost over decades, especially as some of these liabilities are unlikely to materialise as they are backing for loan agreements to various countries.

Given that in 2016 the gross UK contribution to the EU was £13B the government will still have extra cash to play with and depending on their political priorities they can spend it on the NHS, on infrastructure or give us all a tax-cut.

[meridian]

Given that in 2016 the gross UK contribution to the EU was £13B the government will still have extra cash to play with

You do know the difference between gross and net, right?

[northernladyuk]

You do know the difference between gross and net, right?

I'm not sure you do.

The UK's contribution to the EU budget - Commons Library briefing - UK Parliament

In 2016/17 the UK made an estimated gross contribution (after the rebate) of £12.2 billion. The UK received £4.1 billion of public sector receipts from the EU, so the UK’s net public sector contribution to the EU was an estimated £8.1 billion.

[Mordac]

I'm not sure you do.

The UK's contribution to the EU budget - Commons Library briefing - UK Parliament

In 2016/17 the UK made an estimated gross contribution (after the rebate) of £12.2 billion. The UK received £4.1 billion of public sector receipts from the EU, so the UK’s net public sector contribution to the EU was an estimated £8.1 billion.

The key difference being the EU decides how its money is spent in the UK, not the elected UK government. E.g. the £60m bribe to Cornwall, which didn't work out very well ()
It gives the EU the opportunity to interfere in member states where it is in the EU's interest to do so. I predict some more EU meddling in Catalonia, of a more obvious and blatant nature, if they're not doing so already.

[meridian]

The key difference being the EU decides how its money is spent in the UK, not the elected UK government. E.g. the £60m bribe to Cornwall, which didn't work out very well ()
It gives the EU the opportunity to interfere in member states where it is in the EU's interest to do so. I predict some more EU meddling in Catalonia, of a more obvious and blatant nature, if they're not doing so already.

Ah yes, the old “evil EU, nice Tories” argument. How’s that working out for Cornwall, Wales, Yorkshire, etc?

[darmstadt]

The key difference being the EU decides how its money is spent in the UK, not the elected UK government. E.g. the £60m bribe to Cornwall, which didn't work out very well ()
It gives the EU the opportunity to interfere in member states where it is in the EU's interest to do so. I predict some more EU meddling in Catalonia, of a more obvious and blatant nature, if they're not doing so already.

Actually the money spent in the UK is voted on by your elected representatives in the EU. Much like MP's in parliament will also vote on such subjects or do faceless civil servants just decide on where it goes?

[Mordac]

Ah yes, the old “evil EU, nice Tories” argument. How’s that working out for Cornwall, Wales, Yorkshire, etc?

So you believe the EU are totally altruistic? The track record would tend to suggest very much the opposite.
And I think the Tories are far from perfect, just not quite as far from perfect as any of the alternatives. I don't believe those regions would be any better off under Labour, if that's what you're asking. But that's getting off the point. EU "subsidies" are nothing more than bribes, often pointless and a total waste of money, but if it makes the EU look like a friendly benefactor, what's not to like?

[northernladyuk]

So you believe the EU are totally altruistic?

What a ridiculous straw man.

[Mordac]

Actually the money spent in the UK is voted on by your elected representatives in the EU. Much like MP's in parliament will also vote on such subjects or do faceless civil servants just decide on where it goes?

I live in London, which has 8 MEPs. That is not even the illusion of democracy, we are simply expected to vote for our "favourite" party and we get given our MEPs from the party lists based on the proportion of votes. It is why I only ever vote UKIP in EU elections, although I fully expect them to be useless at least they are doing their best to make themselves redundant.
Elected representatives should be accountable to the electorate, but with PR they are only accountable to their party. Fortunately we won't have to concern ourselves with such matters for much longer.

[woohoo]

Actually the money spent in the UK is voted on by your elected representatives in the EU. Much like MP's in parliament will also vote on such subjects or do faceless civil servants just decide on where it goes?

I didn't even know which MEP's represented the NW. Looked at the first one on http://www.europarl.europa.eu - Theresa Griffin, degree in theatre studies and English. Did have a stint as a contractor though. But not inspiring.