In article ,
Chris Hogg wrote:
+1 Especially as they's all have to agree to it, and I can't see the
net beneficiaries doing that. They're going to be 10 billion Euros
worse off, per annum. No wonder they're trying to make things
difficult. The other side of that coin is that we'll be the same
amount better off. It should go some way to cover the cost of paying
World Trade Association tariffs if we come out hard. Not only that,
but a while ago I heard minigod Nige say that the dues we'd receive on
EU imports to the UK would be greater than the dues we'd pay on our
exports to the EU. Whether the Delors analysis takes that into
account, I didn't go looking.

Ah. UKIP. That font of all knowledge. I take it you didn't hear Paul
Nuttall being interviewed on R4 Today on Tuesday? Where he said after
leaving the EU, the UK would be free to make trade agreements with those
EU countries it chose to - like Germany. Of course he was pulled up on
this and attempted to back pedal. But it does show the sort of thing their
supporters are told to believe.

The fall in the value of the pound has already cost us more in increased
import costs than any net saving in EU contributions after we leave.

--
*Learn from your parents' mistakes - use birth control.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.