It has been reported that Theresa May’s government is set to reject the latest Brexit demand from the European Union regarding the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice after Brexit.
Jacob Rees-Mogg has already spoken out against the request for the ECJ to have an ‘indefinite’ period of influence in the United Kingdom after we leave the European Union, and now it seems that our own negotiators are on the verge of telling Brussels that it’s a ‘no.’
According to a report in the Financial Times:
A prolonged role for the Luxembourg court is expected to be rejected outright by the British prime minister, who has struggled to convince sovereignty-minded Brexiters to accept ECJ jurisdiction even for a time-limited transition after Brexit.
Jacob Rees-Mogg, a Conservative MP who chairs the party’s pro-Leave faction, said the commission plan would turn Britain into a “convict state”.
“I think the EU is going to suggest some things that the British government will reject this week and this sounds like one of them,” he said. “It would turn us from a vassal state into a convict state, sentenced to hard labour for our love of democracy.”
Should the ECJ become the dispute settlement body for the withdrawal agreement it would require Britain to accept its rulings well beyond the end of a transition, which the UK wants to last for around two years after Brexit in 2019.
Indefinite oversight is required because parts of the withdrawal deal, such as the financial settlement of at least €40-45bn, will be potentially discharged over a decade or more.
Here’s hoping that this is the first of many examples of Britain finally having the balls to stand up to Brussels!
EU on verge of financial collapse as Netherlands REFUSES new budget demands
It has been reported that The Netherlands has delivered a resounding NO to Brussels chiefs after EU rulers made it clear that members’ financial contributions would have to increase once the United Kingdom leaves the European Union.
As the United Kingdom has been contributing around 12% of the EU’s total budget up until now, it is clear that our decision to leave is going to leave the black hole in their balance sheet to end all black holes.
Furthermore, a failure by the UK government to vote through the Brexit deal will result in a ‘no deal’ scenario taking place and no ‘divorce bill’ being paid to the European Union.
Predictably, Brussels has demanded higher payments from the remaining 27 nations to cover the ongoing shortfall (it could get a lot worse as well if we just walk away from negotiations), and now representatives of The Netherlands have come out with a resounding ‘on yer bike, Jean-Claude.’
You would have thought that they could make up for the loss of income by becoming a more efficient, transparent and streamlined organisation, or is that just crazy ‘blue sky thinking?’
According to a report in The Express:
BRUSSELS chiefs face a desperate and lengthy battle with EU member governments as they count the financial cost of the UK leaving the bloc as the Netherlands became the latest member to refuse to pay more to plug the budget blackhole left by Brexit.
Jean-Claude Juncker has ordered EU nations to prop-up the ailing bloc in the wake of the UK’s departure by raising their contributions to 1 per cent of GDP.
European budget commissioner Guenther Oettinger revealed the EU faces an £11billion shortfall due to Brexit, which forms part of an overall £18billion budget blackhole caused by other crises including migration.
The Netherlands is not the only member nation to come out against coughing up higher contributions – Austria, Sweden and Denmark have also expressed concerns.
But the message from the Hague’s government papers is clear, reading: “The Netherlands can not accept increasing its gross contribution to the EU budget.
“A smaller EU means a smaller EU budget. In addition, new priorities need to be funded from the savings of existing programmes.”
Holland argues countries on the west coast of Europe, including the Netherlands, Ireland, Denmark and Spain will already be hit in the pocket by Britain’s decision to unshackle itself from the bloc.
Good for them we say!
Strictly speaking, Brexit is all about an issue that is a matter for the EU’s top brass and the people of the United Kingdom – nobody else.
We didn’t vote for Brexit just to upset those countries that are left behind after the process has been finalised – if anything we have set the ball rolling to show the rest of the continent that it can be done!
Our message for our European neighbours is a simple one.
If you are dissatisfied with the way that Brussels treats you after Brexit, you have the power to take the future into your own hands.
Unreasonable financial demands should be met with a resounding ‘no’ in the first instance, and if this falls upon deaf ears the only reasonable option is for governments to ask their people the same questions that we were asked in June 2016.
There is another way.