Failing appetite for EU deal making

SIR, – I am puzzled by the EU demands about settling the divorce bill for leaving the EU.

Currently we make a net contribution of about £8.6billion per year. The planned budget cycle of the EU is typically seven years and our triggering of Article 50 and subsequent departure date mean that currently we had committed to a further two years within the current budget cycle beyond our departure date.

This would similar to sitting down to dinner and ordering seven courses but then deciding we weren’t really that hungry and changing our minds after three courses and stating that we would be leaving after five courses.

As we had originally collectively agreed to the seven courses our maximum obligation could only be £17.2billion. Yet if we were to remain for all seven courses (including transition) we should not be asked for any additional contributions.

In the worst case it has been suggested that the total EU divorce bill is estimated at between £60-£100billion. This strikes me as extortionate.

This is equivalent to an extra £1-£2billion per year for each year that we have been members. The size of this retrospective bill is eye-watering but has no legal basis. This has not however stopped the EU from making the claim.

This is a very bad deal. The no-deal option is becoming increasingly more attractive. In light of EU continued unwillingness to negotiate reasonably more active planning for no deal should start immediately. David Philip, Knockhall

Way, Newburgh