United Kingdom and Gibraltar European Union membership referendum
all articles
Boris Johnson has now been Prime Minister of the UK for just over a month - but the other EU states are still waiting for a substantive new initiative in the deadlocked Brexit negotiations. Instead, Johnson threatens his counterparts on the continent again, not to fulfill the financial obligations of Britain after the EU exit.
If it comes to a Brexit without a contract, his country would not have to pay the full sum of 39 billion pounds (43 billion euros), said Johnson the broadcaster Sky News on the sidelines of the G7 summit in Biarritz. He could then spend on November 1, the day after the planned EU exit, large parts of the sum, for example, to support British farmers.
The EU Commission reacted coolly. "All obligations of the 28 member countries should be respected," said a spokeswoman on Monday. That applies "also and especially", should Britain leave the EU without an agreement. "Settling the bills is central to starting a new relationship." EU Budget Commissioner Günther Oettinger told the "Augsburger Allgemeine" that Johnson "would certainly not have happy arrangements with us about the future, if he refuses to pay".
"Then there is no trade agreement"
Behind the scenes, EU officials are even clearer. "As long as there is no settlement agreement, there is no trade agreement," says a senior diplomat. Therefore, even after a no-deal Brexit, Johnson would have to talk to the EU again about the resignation statement: "The topic will not go away."
The background is that even after a no-deal Brexit, the EU would be by far the most important trading partner of Great Britain. This would leave the British government in dire need of concluding a trade agreement with the EU as soon as possible, even to reduce the potentially devastating effects of tariffs and other trade barriers on their own economies.
Johnson's claim that he is no longer obliged to pay the bill in the case of a no-deal Brexit is denied in Brussels. Needless to say, London must meet its obligations under EU membership even after its end, diplomats say - that's what international law demands.
more on the subject
In addition, the exact amount of the exit calculation is not yet clear. At the end of 2017, the EU and the UK government agreed on a complicated methodology for determining the amount. The British Court of Auditors OBR later came to around £ 38 billion. They are composed primarily of three items:
- outstanding UK contributions to the EU's current seven-year budget, which will run until the end of 2020;
- Commitments from the EU budget, which will only be due in the future;
- Pension payments for EU officials, including nearly 2,000 Britons.
However, the £ 38 billion was based on the assumption that Britain will leave the EU as originally planned on 31 March 2019. However, as it is still a member and continues to pay contributions, the withdrawal bill drops. Should the UK leave the EU on 31 October, it would have to pay just around £ 32.8 billion, six billion less than Johnson claims, according to a new mid-July calculation of the OBR.
"That does not give anyone sleepless nights"
The prime minister, however, seems to be heading for a far greater cut. According to Sky News, he wants to transfer in the case of a no-deal Brexit only nine billion pounds to Brussels. The "Sunday Times" even reports that a lawyer from the government assumes a payment obligation of only seven billion pounds.
Johnson's stated goal is to use such threats to persuade the EU to make concessions in the negotiations. How this should succeed, however, remains his secret. For one thing, the good 25 billion pounds (28 billion euros) that Johnson is threatening to withhold, a relatively small sum. It represents only 2.5 percent of the EU's seven-year budget - which in turn only feeds one percent of the Member States' gross national income. If in doubt, they would be in a position to fill the gap.
The damage that Johnson would do to implement his threat, on the other hand, could be immense. If, for example, a comprehensive trade agreement with the EU were to be delayed, losses to the British state would presumably add up to a multiple of the £ 25 billion saved within a very short time. "Johnson's threat therefore does not give anyone sleepless nights," mocks an EU diplomat.
What does Johnson want?
But this raises the question: what is Johnson's purpose with his repeated threats to break the Brexit bill? In Brussels, there are only speculations: He marked for domestic political reasons, the strong man, is a theory. Another says that Johnson is no longer interested in a withdrawal agreement, but is heading towards a no-deal-Brexit - and the dispute over the withdrawal bill is already part of the strategy to blame the EU for the failure to blame.
Not only the fact that Johnson has not yet submitted to the EU a new substantive proposal to solve the Brexit dilemma is fitting. Also at the G7 summit, he reassigned to the EU the responsibility for a Brexit treaty. Meanwhile, Britain's pro-Brexit press - most notably Johnson's Hausblatt, the "Telegraph" - has been working hard for weeks on the myth that Britain is threatening to become a victim of EU stubbornness.
In the face of this, the otherwise rather cautious "Financial Times" recently cleared its entire column of commentary in an inflammatory appeal to call on the British Parliament to stop Johnson's "no-deal-madness." Immediately after assuming power, the prime minister "put away the mask": The No Deal was apparently the "real plan" of his government.