So there seems to be some debate about how much we should pay as part of Brexit

[Rich]

Let me just get this clear in my head. So, our government (the responsible, hard headed, flag waving patriots who put britain first and dont stand for any nonsense from this euro cretins) are going to try to negotiate a reduction on a bill that we have precisely no legal obligation to pay?

That doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Cant we just find a half decent lawyer? I know a guy....

I'm not sure that upsetting the other party is a great tactic for the rest of the Brexit negotiations. We could do with a concession or two being thrown our way.

[Burney]

I'm not sure that upsetting the other party is a great tactic for the rest of the Brexit negotiations. We could do with a concession or two being thrown our way.

Yes. Increasingly, however, it's becoming apparent that the EU Commission are ideologues rather than pragmatists. This makes negotiating sensibly with them rather difficult.

[Rich]

Yes. Increasingly, however, it's becoming apparent that the EU Commission are ideologues rather than pragmatists. This makes negotiating sensibly with them rather difficult.

They're going to make a bloody example of us, B

My other half is going to have to go and live in Amsterdam if things don't work out.

[Burney]

They're going to make a bloody example of us, B

My other half is going to have to go and live in Amsterdam if things don't work out.

If that's what they want, then have at it. EU member states have as much to lose by such an outcome as we do. To push for such an outcome would be to put the ideological purity of the EU project ahead of the interests of its member states and I wonder how forgiving the people of those member states would be of such as stance once the results started to bite.

[Peter]

If that's what they want, then have at it. EU member states have as much to lose by such an outcome as we do. To push for such an outcome would be to put the ideological purity of the EU project ahead of the interests of its member states and I wonder how forgiving the people of those member states would be of such as stance once the results started to bite.

But the EU Project, by definition, cares little for the notion of 'member states'. States are merely local agents, subordinate to the union and its interests. This is the real reason you wanted out.

[Burney]

But the EU Project, by definition, cares little for the notion of 'member states'. States are merely local agents, subordinate to the union and its interests. This is the real reason you wanted out.

Of course. However, it has only succeeded as far as it has by obscuring that fact as much as possible and by being able to point to material benefits for the citizens in return for losing their rights of self-determination. For the citizens of the EU to see the ideology play out red in tooth and claw in a way that hurts them might be a somewhat different proposition imo.

[Peter]

Of course. However, it has only succeeded as far as it has by obscuring that fact as much as possible and by being able to point to material benefits for the citizens in return for losing their rights of self-determination. For the citizens of the EU to see the ideology play out red in tooth and claw in a way that hurts them might be a somewhat different proposition imo.

They are only really losing the right to come here, and they are losing that because of us, not the EU. No problem spinning that, I could do it in my lunch break.

And the only countries where citizens are bothered about that are those that will be receiving a fortune from the EU to invest in infrastructure etc. No problem there either.

The real problem is the example. We are leaving because our voters decided that they want to. That is dangerous so yes, they will make it difficult and will be pointing out how ****ed we are because of it for years.

I did find that speech funny the other day. The chap lists all the the wonderful things we are going to miss out on and manages to completely misunderstand the fact that those 'wonderful things' are in fact our biggest fears. Even I would probably leave in the face of them.

They just dont get us, b. They never did.

[Ash]

I'm not sure that upsetting the other party is a great tactic for the rest of the Brexit negotiations. We could do with a concession or two being thrown our way.

They're already upset, Rich. I think Peter is on the mark on this one. **** 'em.

[Burney]

They're already upset, Rich. I think Peter is on the mark on this one. **** 'em.

On one level, I'd love to see us walk away while flicking v-signs at them. However, one can see that this would precipitate an all-out shítstorm for both sides that would be in neither side's interests.

However, one starts to suspect that a break that's as acrimonious as humanly possible is actually what the Commission wants, so I wouldn't rule out such an outcome.

[Peter]

On one level, I'd love to see us walk away while flicking v-signs at them. However, one can see that this would precipitate an all-out shítstorm for both sides that would be in neither side's interests.

However, one starts to suspect that a break that's as acrimonious as humanly possible is actually what the Commission wants, so I wouldn't rule out such an outcome.

The thought does occur that the 'divorce bill' and the EU's insistence on being bloody minded are crucial instruments for our own government. Let's face it, once we are out the usual excuses of blaming the EU have a shelf life. This is the only transition Westminster really cares about. In the decade after we leave they need an excuse to explain why the economy is ****e, why we are still overrrun by immigrants, why we havent spent any money on the NHS. THe divorce bill is crucial in this.