Project Lie

[Mordac]

1. It certainly is not a liability on a balance sheet (see quotation from fullfacts below). How could it be? It is a reduction in the 'membership fee'.
2. The 350 million per week is never removed. Not in reality. Not in accounting terms.
3. Cash back is money which is returned after money has been paid. The rebate isn't like that. The rebate is never paid. The amount of money that is sent is approximately 250 million per week. See quotation from fullfacts below.
4 Your level of knowledge about the nature of the rebate is irrelevant - but see quotation from fullfacts below.
5 The UK does not have to negotiate a way of not actually leaving. It can withdraw Article 50 unilaterally. This is however irrelevant to the context in which the 350 million per week lie was originally published.
6 In what way is there '£350m is technically available to spend on the NHS'. 250 million per week is available. How is other 100 million available?
7 Project Lie - QED. Or am I missing something (and if so what)?

Assuming you don't know your way around a balance sheet, I'll tackle Q5.
Do you seriously think we can brush the last 2 years under the carpet and pretend it never happened? We can (legally) revoke A50, but if you think that comes at no cost, I admire your optimism. I fear the price we'll actually pay is beyond comprehension.

[Old Greg]

Assuming you don't know your way around a balance sheet, I'll tackle Q5.
Do you seriously think we can brush the last 2 years under the carpet and pretend it never happened? We can (legally) revoke A50, but if you think that comes at no cost, I admire your optimism. I fear the price we'll actually pay is beyond comprehension.

UK has a veto on the rebate. End of. And none of this has any relevance to the original claim, made before the referendum. Are you saying it was a lie then, but since Article 50 it has become true?

Are you really still claiming that the UK sends 350 million per week to the EU or that leaving the EU will free up 350 million per week for spending? You're embarrassing yourself now. And your balance sheet line is unadulterated nonsense. There is no liability for the rebate sum. Imagine you have agreed a discount for golf club membership and that the discount is contractually guaranteed - that analogy may help you understand that there is no 'balance sheet entry. Refer back to the fullfacts extract.

[Old Greg]

@Mods. Could we make this thread a sticky please?

[Mordac]

UK has a veto on the rebate. End of. And none of this has any relevance to the original claim, made before the referendum. Are you saying it was a lie then, but since Article 50 it has become true?

Are you really still claiming that the UK sends 350 million per week to the EU or that leaving the EU will free up 350 million per week for spending? You're embarrassing yourself now. And your balance sheet line is unadulterated nonsense. There is no liability for the rebate sum. Imagine you have agreed a discount for golf club membership and that the discount is contractually guaranteed - that analogy may help you understand that there is no 'balance sheet entry. Refer back to the fullfacts extract.

I'm not playing you at Twister any time soon. Blair sold us down the river to the tune of a £7bn cut to the rebate (initially spread over 6 years, but then continuing in perpetuity), and he didn't even have to ask Parliament for permission. And in case you were wondering what he got in return, I'll spare you the trouble of having to look it up. It was actually fu*k all. (December 2005 EU summit).
Yet you spout that the rebate is forever and contractually guaranteed. It isn't now, and hasn't been, at least since 2005. I don't mind you calling me a liar, it's a free country after all, but when some of your "facts" are actually "bollocks" you embarrass yourself.

[Old Greg]

I'm not playing you at Twister any time soon. Blair sold us down the river to the tune of a £7bn cut to the rebate (initially spread over 6 years, but then continuing in perpetuity), and he didn't even have to ask Parliament for permission. And in case you were wondering what he got in return, I'll spare you the trouble of having to look it up. It was actually fu*k all. (December 2005 EU summit).
Yet you spout that the rebate is forever and contractually guaranteed. It isn't now, and hasn't been, at least since 2005. I don't mind you calling me a liar, it's a free country after all, but when some of your "facts" are actually "bollocks" you embarrass yourself.

Are you saying that the UK does not have a veto over changes to the rebate?

[Lance]

Blair sold us down the river to the tune of a £7bn cut to the rebate (initially spread over 6 years, but then continuing in perpetuity), and he didn't even have to ask Parliament for permission.

Citation needed.

[Mordac]

Are you saying that the UK does not have a veto over changes to the rebate?

We did, but that nice Mr Blair coughed some of it up. How much remains hasn't been tested, but if the French sniff enough blood we may soon find out.

[Mordac]

Citation needed.

Took me a while, but here you go...

Blair clinches deal with offer of big rebate cut | UK news | The Guardian

[Old Greg]

We did, but that nice Mr Blair coughed some of it up. How much remains hasn't been tested, but if the French sniff enough blood we may soon find out.

You didn't answer the question. So again:

Are you saying that the UK does not have a veto over changes to the rebate?

[Lance]

Took me a while, but here you go...

Blair clinches deal with offer of big rebate cut | UK news | The Guardian

Thanks.

Not exactly for nothing though was it?