The difficulty of selling an exorbitant EU ‘divorce bill’ to the electorate
SIR – I hope that the Prime Minister and her team will be able to justify any “divorce bill” paid to the EU.
Sums must not be plucked from the air, but fully justified and audited. Most of the information upon which to calculate this payment is readily available. Our share of EU assets must be fully accounted for at our exit.
This is not an auction, but an orderly departure. We will pay what is due, but no more.
Michael Mcgough
Westport, Co Mayo, Ireland
SIR – This fiasco about how much we should pay the EU epitomises why so many of us wish to leave.
I know exactly what my debts are, and so do my creditors. Why are we having to negotiate?
Joe Collicutt
Fareham, Hampshire
SIR – It is time to reconsider our negotiation strategy with the EU on the size of the so-called “divorce bill”.
We should now state clearly that each time they place further obstacles in our way, we will reduce our offer of payment until it reaches zero.
John Warden
Driffield, East Yorkshire
SIR – When in the history of the EU has it ever conceded anything?
We should offer no money, withdraw from the talks and move to World Trade Organisation terms for our dealings around the world.
Jonathan Arthur
London SW7
SIR – Most of the remaining 27 EU members are also members of Nato. They would have a stronger case in arguing that Britain should pay for future EU liabilities if they were meeting their current Nato financial commitments.
That may not be an issue for the European Commission and its negotiating team, but it is an issue for the national governments from which the Commission derives its authority. Continental Europe has at least as much to fear from a resurgent Russia and an unstable Middle East as we do.
Jeremy Stocker
Willoughby, Warwickshire
SIR – You report (November 21) that Britain’s divorce bill offer to the EU may reach £40 billion.
That’s around £600 for every man, woman and child in Britain. Perhaps someone should write this figure on the side of a bus.
Richard Tweed
Croydon, Surrey
SIR – You describe the coin-toss to decide the new location of the European Medicines Agency postbrexit as a farce (report, November 21).
Surely we’re the ones with our trousers down, having lost this agency and the expertise and prestige it brings. Every day seems to bring a new example of what Brexit is costing us – and still there’s no sign of that promised £350 million a week.
Paul D Smith
Enfield, Middlesex