So if Scotland were to secede, and there were building programs planned in Scotland for 5 years ahead, with contracts signed by the UK government, your position is that Scotland wouldn't be required to pay a penny towards them? The rUK would have to stump up the entire cost?
Just wondering if your position is consistent and fair, or just a bit of "stick it to the foreigners" jingoism.
When challenging a Kzin, a simple scream of rage is sufficient. You scream and you leap.
Originally Posted by George CarlinOriginally Posted by Douglas Adams
I think your analogy is slightly mixed up and not at all like the situation we have with the UK and the EU but I will answer it. No, not at all, I would expect Scotland to pay for them. I would not expect Scotland to pay upfront anyway but only when the projects actually go ahead.
However, let me ask you this. If Scotland were to secede, would you expect them to take on a share of the national debt in proportion to the population share? Would you also expect them to 'receive' a share of the UK's assets also in proportion to population share? I would expect both to happen as its is the only fair way to do it.
All I am saying is at this stage it would be a mistake for the UK to agree to a figure on the total financial settlement. I would (and I think they are doing it) is to see what they feel they are legally obliged to cover and offer only that. Anything else will be subject to the rest of the negotiations.
If Poland leaves/gets kicked out of the EU in the next few weeks and as it receives annually roughly what the UK pays in, would the EU insist it pays £100bn to Poland to honour ongoing commitments? No didnt think so.
Anyway currently until agreement, all the UK owes the EU in full and final payment is 126 tonnes of nuclear waste.
https://www.theguardian.com/environm...t-nuclear-deal
“It might just be a reminder that a boatload of plutonium could end up at a harbour in Antwerp unless an arrangement is made,” one nuclear expert told the FT.
13/11/2022 Sir Keir Starmer. "Brexit is safe in my hands, Let me be really clear about Brexit. There is no case for going back into the EU and no case for going into the single market or customs union. Freedom of movement is over"
Man, these Brexit talks are going to take ages now. They should just kill these six wing-clipped ravens and speed up the talks by say, a conservative ballpark figure of like, one trillion times.
WoW: Crowcloak (Druid) & Neesheya (Paladin) @ Sylvanas EU (/ˈkaZHo͞oəl/) | GW2: Siqqa (Asura Engineer) @ Piken Square EU
If builders built houses the way programmers built programs,the first woodpecker to come along would destroy civilization. - Weinberg's 2nd law
He seeks them here, he seeks them there, he seeks those lupins everywhere!
So the EU can warn Britain that UK access to radioactive isotopes could be affected. This is crucial to the treatment of cancer which could affect millions of UK (and EU citizens living in the UK) and you presumably are happy with this?
https://www.rcplondon.ac.uk/news/eu-...dical-isotopes
If you read both articles it was actually EU officials that made the 'threat' whereas it was only an 'expert' that mentioned about shipping nuclear waste to Europe, not the UK Government. And that was in reation to the EU saying that after Brexit the ownership of nuclear waste from other european countries currently in the UK would be transferred to the UK therefore it would be the UK's problem.
- - - Updated - - -
Didn't read like sarcasm to me, just another attempt at UK bad, EU good.