THERE is a received wisdom among diehard Remainers that the EU has the upper hand in the negotiations regarding Britain’s exit from the EU.
According to this theory, Brexit Secretary David Davis has been reduced to a position of almost kissing the boots of his opposite number Michel Barnier, begging him for whatever access to European markets he might be kind enough to grant us and imploring him to let us off with just a fraction of our €100billion bill for leaving the EU.
Just how big a nonsense this is has become clear with the publication of the minutes from a meeting in Brussels last week between Barnier and the House of Lords’ EU select committee.
His demand for Britain to pay a bill for the privilege of leaving the EU is delivered not from a position of strength but from one of desperation. He is fearful that the EU will break up when deprived of its second-largest net financial contributor.
As he told the House of Lords committee: “There are thousands of town halls, municipalities, businesses and universities that have undertaken projects on the basis of those undertakings and commitments. If we are to cut 15 per cent or whatever – that is the UK share – there will be an explosion everywhere across the board.”
It is the second time he has used this language. Speaking back in May when the EU suddenly and without any attempt at justification raised its leaving bill from €50billion to €100billion, he said: “The situation might be explosive if we have to stop programmes. Can you imagine the political problems which might arise?”
GETTY
Well, indeed. Just think of all those poor farmers in Mr Barnier’s native France who, without UK cash, might be deprived of their EU handouts for overgrown pastures and vineyards. Some of them might actually start having to produce some food for a living rather than doing as they do now, simply pocketing money for owning the land itself.
Think, too, of the poor owner of a vegetable chilling plant in Bulgaria who wants a grant to modernise his factory but finds there is no money left in the kitty. Or maybe don’t feel all that sorry for him – he was one recipient of EU funds held responsible for €888million worth of fraud identified in 2015. It turned out that, besides the factory, he also owned the company which was going to undertake the modernisation work, the bill for which he had exaggerated.
Exaggerated bills – of which Michel Barnier’s is a prime example – have long been part of EU culture. From the fraudulent payments for nonexistent sheep to the £120,000 a year expenses which can be claimed by MEPs without having to provide much in the way of receipts, the EU is drunk on easy cash.
PA
For decades Britain has been paying more than its fair share. Of 28 EU nations Britain is the second-highest of only eight net contributors. Germany contributes a higher net sum but then it has a higher population. As for EU spending, Britain receives less per head than any other EU member – at €107 per person per year it is a fraction of the ¤2,993 per head spent on the citizens of Luxembourg.
I dare say we would manage just fine without those payments – not least the £900,000 in agricultural subsidies received in the 10 years leading up to 2011 by Lord Heseltine, the Europhile Conservative who owns 1,200 acres in Oxfordshire and Northamptonshire.
It isn’t just over its budget that the EU faces a crisis when Britain leaves. How many times have we heard Remainers try to assert that British exporters face Armageddon if the EU negotiations collapse and tariff barriers are erected to crossChannel trade?
GETTY
Tariffs would take a chunk out of our economy, which is why the Government is working to achieve a free trade deal. But to make out that Britain would suffer disproportionately is wrong.
In 2016, we exported £241billion worth of goods and services to other EU countries and imported £312billion worth from them – giving us a trade deficit of £71billion. With the rest of the world, by the way, we ran a £34billion surplus.
Put another way, EU exporters have even more to lose than UK exporters if the EU chooses to provoke a trade war. Michel Barnier must already know this. The question is: how much longer are commercial interests in the EU going to let him carry on trying to punish the UK before they round on him and warn him that he will be punishing them even more? My guess is it won’t be much longer before there is a serious backlash against Barnier and his team from elsewhere in the EU.
I wouldn’t rate his chances of remaining in his job as chief negotiator all the way to the end of the Brexit process. The sad thing is that we would be able to do rapid, amicable deals individually with almost all the countries which make up the EU – with I guess just Spain trying to make a thing about Gibraltar and Greece demanding the Elgin Marbles. It is the institution itself, with its arrogance and grandstanding, which is the problem.
Michel Barnier has revealed his fears that Britain’s departure could cause political chaos within the EU. Maybe it will not even survive Brexit.
I am rapidly coming to the conclusion that that would be no bad thing.
http://www.express.co.uk/comment/expresscomment/831675/Brexit-bill-uk-money-collapse-eu-ross-clark
