EUROSCEPTIC Conservative MPs have warned that handing over money to Brussels following Brexit would be unacceptable to voters.
They are insisting the UK Government should not pay a so-called divorce bill to leave the European Union following suggestions Theresa May is prepared to pay €40 billion (£36bn) in order to strike a comprehensive free trade agreement with Brussels.
One MP has gone as far as to say Brussels should be giving money back to the UK instead.
The bill has been one of the main stumbling blocks in Brexit negotiations between Westminster and Brussels. It has been reported that the Government will only stump up the cash if the EU treats it as part of a deal on future relations, including any future trade agreement.
A senior Government source said that “no such figure has been agreed” while another Whitehall source dismissed it as “speculation”.
EU officials have said that trade talks are on hold until progress has been made on the financial settle ment, as well as the rights of citizens in Northern Ireland.
Conservative MP Peter Bone said that such a vast amount of money leaving the UK for Brussels would likely be blocked by Parliament.
“One of the prime reasons the UK voted to leave the EU was to stop sending them billions of pounds per year, so it would be totally bizarre to give the EU any money, let alone £36bn, given also that over the years that we have been in the EU or its predecessor we have given them, net, over £200bn,” he said.
“So if there was going to be any transfer of money then it should be from the EU to the UK.
“I think it would be very strange of Parliament to pay billions of pounds to leave an organisation that you have given hundreds of billions of pounds to and got nothing in return. That would be a very strange decision, so I don’t think it would happen.”
Jacob Rees-Mogg, MP for North East Somerset, added: “There is no logic to this figure, legally we owe nothing.”
The proposal would see Britain offer to make net payments to the EU of some €10bn a year for up to three years after Brexit as a partial down-payment on a final €40bn settlement.
Former Cabinet minister John Redwood completed the criticism of any future Brexit bill when he told LBC Radio: “Ministers would be quite wrong to be talking about any figures, we don’t owe them any money.
“It would be silly to be offering something when the EU is still not very willing to talk and is not coming up with anything constructive on its own side.
“The EU’s tactic is very clear. It’s divide and rule to try and get Britain negotiating with herself.”
A senior Whitehall source is quoted to have said the EU’s position is that the fee should be €60bn (£54bn), but the “actual bottom line” was €50bn (£45bn); the UK’s position was €30bn (£27bn) and “the landing zone is €40bn (£36bn) even if the public and politicians are not all there yet”.
Meanwhile, the SNP’s business spokesperson at Westminster has echoed warnings by business leaders over the UK government’s “haphazard” Brexit approach.
Drew Hendry MP added that the continued uncertainty over the future of EU workers living in the UK posed a “real and present danger” to business across the UK.
Speaking following the Institute of Directors calls on the UK Government to “engage properly on the most imminent risk to business from Brexit”, Hendry said that the Tories should end the internal squabbling and counter-briefings and instead work towards protecting the UK’s key businesses, jobs and economic opportunities.
Earlier in the week the Scottish Chambers of Commerce’s quarterly survey pressed the Tory government to seek an “early agreement on the rights of existing EU workers to live and work in the UK”. Hendry’s latest comments echoed this sentiment.
“We already know that an extreme Brexit has the potential to cost Scotland up to 80,000 jobs and £11.2bn per year, yet time and time again, warnings from the business community to the Tory government go ignored — causing uncertainty that is toxic to investment and growth,” he said.
“The uncertainty and threat is further fermented by the continued failure of the UK Government to seek an early agreement on the rights of existing EU workers, who are key to the success and growth of businesses.”
In other news, the Royal College of Nursing has warned that the NHS could possibly “go under” unless EU staff are given reassurances.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel