Jump to content
Thailand Visa Forum by Thai Visa | The Nation
webfact

Stop fighting over Brexit and get real, Jim O'Neill tells UK

Recommended Posts

On 09/09/2017 at 11:27 AM, chrissables said:

There are no legal requirement to pay anything after the day we leave. Do you not understand that?

And that would be terminally damaging to our international reputation

 

Do you not understand that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, chrissables said:

You are taking my statement out of context. I was (trying) to explain what is the law, not necessary what i thought should happen.

 

Having said that, paying an imaginary bill of ? billions of euros without an independently audited breakdown of costs would make us extremely stupid, and no better for our international reputation.

You have not explained the law

How does article 50 release the UK from obligations undertaken whilst the treaties was in force

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, rockingrobin said:

You have not explained the law

How does article 50 release the UK from obligations undertaken whilst the treaties was in force

I am far from qualified to explain the law. But i can and have read enough articles referring to what payments, if any are due as part of the settlement the EU is demanding.

 

I have at no time disagreed with payments that are legally due. Why do you think otherwise? All comments i have made are referring to payments due after we leave.

 

Also i have stated we should honour the last year of the 7 year investment we agreed to.

 

Had the EU bureaucrats and politicians been as smart as they think they are, payments due on leaving would have been put into law and the treaties. They in arrogance cocked up and are now trying to play hardball with threats, when in law their hand is quite weak. But for sure they will throw their toys out the pram to try and punish the UK for following a democratic decision. Pathetic really.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, chrissables said:

I am far from qualified to explain the law. But i can and have read enough articles referring to what payments, if any are due as part of the settlement the EU is demanding.

 

I have at no time disagreed with payments that are legally due. Why do you think otherwise? All comments i have made are referring to payments due after we leave.

 

Also i have stated we should honour the last year of the 7 year investment we agreed to.

 

Had the EU bureaucrats and politicians been as smart as they think they are, payments due on leaving would have been put into law and the treaties. They in arrogance cocked up and are now trying to play hardball with threats, when in law their hand is quite weak. But for sure they will throw their toys out the pram to try and punish the UK for following a democratic decision. Pathetic really.

You claimed that there was no legal requirement to pay anything after we leave, 

How do you arrive at this conclusion 

There is no need to place obligations on leaving into the treaties , as they are provided for in the Vienna Convention on The Law of Treaties, 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, rockingrobin said:

You claimed that there was no legal requirement to pay anything after we leave, 

How do you arrive at this conclusion 

There is no need to place obligations on leaving into the treaties , as they are provided for in the Vienna Convention on The Law of Treaties, 

I explained how, after reading many articles. Maybe if you believe i am wrong, you can show me where it is written into law?

 

What to me is more interesting (to me) is the EU's inability or refusal to itemise or quantify the payments they demand.

 

I actually believe the UK will pay if a correctly audited and reasonable bill is produced. But to ask for money without that and threaten to not move on the exit negotiations towards a reasonable middle ground is a pathetic way for a government to act.

Edited by chrissables
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, chrissables said:

What to me is more interesting (to me) is the EU's inability or refusal to itemise or quantify the payments they demand.

 

Source?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, onthesoi said:

 

Source?

 

1 minute ago, onthesoi said:

 

Source?

Yes please, i would like to source the bill and a breakdown. 

 

I presume you believe there is one, what is your source?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, chrissables said:

 

Yes please, i would like to source the bill and a breakdown. 

 

I presume you believe there is one, what is your source?

I think you're confused how this works, I didnt make any claims so there is no source for something I never said.

 

You on the other hand claimed:

What to me is more interesting (to me) is the EU's inability or refusal to itemise or quantify the payments they demand.

 

Im asking you for the source of that statement, failure to provide said source implies you're just making stuff up.

Edited by onthesoi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, chrissables said:

I explained how, after reading many articles. Maybe if you believe i am wrong, you can show me where it is written into law?

 

What to me is more interesting (to me) is the EU's inability or refusal to itemise or quantify the payments they demand.

 

I actually believe the UK will pay if a correctly audited and reasonable bill is produced. But to ask for money without that and threaten to not move on the exit negotiations towards a reasonable middle ground is a pathetic way for a government to act.

Art 50 is a standard withdrawal clause, it describes the mechanics of leaving, but does not touch upon the obligations of the leaving member. It states that at some point in time the treaties will cease.

The VCLT is regarded as an "opinion of law" a necessity of international law , which leads us to Art 70 of the VCLT , Consequencesof the Termination of a Treaty

 

Unless the treaty otherwise provides or the parties otherwise agree, the termination of a treaty under its provisions or in accordance with the present Conven tion:

(a) Releases the parties from any obligation further to perform the treaty;

(b) Does not affect any right, obligation or legal situation of the parties created through the execution of the treaty prior to its termination.'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, onthesoi said:

I think you're confused how this works, I didnt make any claims so there is no source for something I never said.

 

You on the other hand claimed:

What to me is more interesting (to me) is the EU's inability or refusal to itemise or quantify the payments they demand.

 

Im asking you for the source of that statement, failure to provide said source implies you're just making stuff up.

I was being sarcastic.

 

I have seen enough politicians on different news shows ask how they have arrived at the amount, nobody has answered. 

 

So made up no. I would be most interested to read it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The day that Brussels can get its books signed off by the auditers ,lets say for the past 10 years ,then we can talk about paying them money .

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, rockingrobin said:

Art 50 is a standard withdrawal clause, it describes the mechanics of leaving, but does not touch upon the obligations of the leaving member. It states that at some point in time the treaties will cease.

The VCLT is regarded as an "opinion of law" a necessity of international law , which leads us to Art 70 of the VCLT , Consequencesof the Termination of a Treaty

 

Unless the treaty otherwise provides or the parties otherwise agree, the termination of a treaty under its provisions or in accordance with the present Conven tion:

(a) Releases the parties from any obligation further to perform the treaty;

(b) Does not affect any right, obligation or legal situation of the parties created through the execution of the treaty prior to its termination.'

If i understand correctly, if the UK refuse to agree to pay, at the leave date they can't force us to pay. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, chrissables said:

If i understand correctly, if the UK refuse to agree to pay, at the leave date they can't force us to pay. 

Enforceability is another issue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The EU cant force the UK to pay but you can expect the pound to be devalued further if they dont.

 

The subsequent losses to the UK via another big currency devaluation would far exceed the divorce bill.

 

Numbers, however, have never been a strong point with Brexiteers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

BANGKOK 21 November 2017 19:20
Sponsors
×