THERESA May has raised the prospect of not paying a £39 billion “divorce bill” to the EU in the event she does not secure a deal.
She made the threat after being asked by a Tory backbencher at Prime Minister’s Questions what she would do in terms of the payment if an agreement on a future trading arrangement was not done.
READ MORE: This is why the window to hold indyref2 opens AFTER Brexit
Replying to Chris Philip, she said: “We are very clear that we need to have a link between the future relationship and the withdrawal agreement, but we are a country that honours our obligations.
“We believe in the rule of law, and therefore we believe in abiding by our legal obligations. However, my hon. Friend is right that the specific offer was made in the spirit of our desire to reach a deal with the European Union and on the basis, as the EU itself has said, that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed. Without a deal, the position changes.”
The proposed financial settlement was part of the withdrawal negotiations that both sides agreed in principle in December to cover outstanding financial obligations and future liabilities arising from the UK’s EU membership.
May’s intervention yesterday comes days after Chancellor Philip Hammond spoke about the financial settlement, suggesting that even with a no deal the UK would still have some financial obligations to the EU. He said to quantify those sums “could require a complex and time-consuming process of arbitration”.
Leading Brexiteer, Jacob Rees-Mogg
In London yesterday the pro-Brexit European Research Group set out its proposals to prevent a hard border in Ireland while keeping the UK out of the customs unions. The group, chaired by Jacob Rees-Mogg, believes the border can remain open after Brexit through the use of technology and by modifying existing arrangements. Its report argued the issue of the border has been allowed to frame negotiations over Brexit.
“The key obstacle in the negotiations is the EU’s concern that goods could enter into the single market area through the Irish border without being compliant with EU standards or tariffs. The question for the EU is whether this risk to the integrity of the single market is so serious that it could block a free trade agreement with the UK,” it said.
The paper was introduced by Rees-Mogg with a panel including former Brexit secretary David Davis, former Northern Ireland secretaries Theresa Villiers and Owen Patterson and former Northern Ireland first minister David Trimble. It suggested customs, VAT, and rules of origin checks could be conducted away from the border, using trusted trader schemes.
READ MORE: People are waking up to the human cost of Tory Brexit blundering
“Such measures can ensure the trade across the Irish border is maintained. The EU will be able to maintain the integrity of its internal market without erecting a hard border along its border with Northern Ireland. At the same time, the United Kingdom will be able to develop a fully independent trade policy rather than remaining a rule-taker,” it said.
But in a blow to Brexiteers, the European Commission president Jean Claude Juncker used his annual State of the Union address to say the EU would stand by Ireland in the Brexit process.
He said: “The European Commission, this parliament and all other 26 member states will always show loyalty and solidarity with Ireland when it comes to the Irish border. This is why we want to find a creative solution that prevents a hard border in Northern Ireland. But we will equally be very outspoken should the British Government walk away from its responsibilities under the Good Friday Agreement. It is not the European Union, it is Brexit that risks making the border more visible in Northern Ireland.”
He urged the UK to understand that it could not be “in some privileged position” post-Brexit, and could not be in part of the single market.
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