LATEST BREXIT NEWS
based on UK and EU official sources

OCT'S HOT
BREXIT NEWS
News, latest facts,
rebuttals to latest
Remain claims...
LATEST DONORS
THANK YOU!
“I am so horrified by what is happening, I have to do what I can to support Brexit. Totally astonished at the weak, pathetic and spineless responses from our Govt to the arrogance of the EU.”
- Lesley Duscherer , Ayrshire
Thank you for your donation,
Lesley!     - Feb 2018
“Keep fighting our corner!”
- Patrick Ford, Kent
Thank you for your donation,
Patrick!     - Feb 2018
“Keep up telling the truth and backing the patriotic people who voted for freedom from the undemocratic cabal that are trying to destroy our country and Europe.... I was born into a Labour family (miners) voted once for them, have since voted for Tories. I put all trust in Mrs May to get us out of EU properly, if she lets us down I'll never vote for them again, they will be finished for many years to come. I wish I could donate more to your cause but am not able to.”
- Susan Saberton, N Yorks
Thank you for your donation,
Susan!     - Feb 2018
“You are doing sterling work against all the odds - congratulations!”
- Ann Donnan, Middx
Thank you for your donation,
Ann!     - Jan 2018
CAN YOU HELP?
We're read by Ministers, ex-Ministers, MPs, MEPs, campaigners and the Public.
We rely 100% on voluntary contributions.
Click for details
We need help

We could so much more if we had a benefactor, and/or lots of people giving small amounts!

NEW EU DATA LAW
GDPR - Facts4EU.Org data & privacy: We use cookies to monitor overall visitor behaviour, like almost all sites. Your privacy is ensured at all times and we can't identify individuals. If you email a comment to us, we do not keep your information. You are not added to a mailing list. We do NOT sell your information to anyone. Donations: We use a fully encrypted payment solutions provider: Stripe. We do not see your credit card or other payment details, only that you have donated and how much. You may contact us at any time if you have any queries about your personal data.
TAKE CONTROL!
and support the fight for a CLEAN BREXIT
Become a Supporter from just £3 and be part of things
SOUTH AFRICAN CRISIS
Brexit Facts4EU
special reports
FOLLOW
@Facts4euOrg
ON TWITTER
You can help us by retweeting. The more people who read our work, the better!
LATEST DONORS
THANK YOU!
“Facts4EU - thank you for your tireless work in exposing the true nature of the EU and the anti-democratic behaviour of all those trying to thwart Brexit. We need you now more than ever!”
- Elizabeth Ford, Kent
Thank you for your donation,
Liz!     - Feb 2018
“I look at your site daily to find information on Brexit to be found nowhere else. Thank you.”
- William Crook, Lancs
Thank you for your donation,
Bill!     - Feb 2018
“Great website shedding light in an otherwise poorly reported area within the mainstream media.”
- Chris Squirrell, UK
Thank you for your donation,
Chris!     - Jan 2018
OCT'S HOT NEWS
News, latest facts,
rebuttals to latest
Remain claims...
URGENT
FUNDING REQUEST
Can you help to
keep us going?
We really need your support
Articles by MPs
and Experts
  
MP or
Official Spokesperson?

Fast Facts
Firm Rebuttals
  Home | LATEST BREXIT
HOT NEWS
| Research
Summary
| Brexit & the
Single Market
| O Brexit
My Brexit
| Your
Articles
| Help
Us
| Contact
Quick Brexit facts from official sources
Read by Ministers, MPs, MEPs, peers, ambassadors, journalists, and the public
BREXIT NEWS  22-31 August 2018
If you’re a journalist or another Brexit organisation please get in touch if you would like to re-use any of our material. All we ask is prior contact and attribution.
 BREXIT FACTS4EU.ORG UPDATE
LETTING YOU KNOW WHAT WE’RE UP TO
In addition to being the only Brexit team to bring you a daily diet of original, researched, factual articles about the EU and Brexit, we have also been working on a few things in the background. We thought you’d like to know about them.
  • The Facts4EU.Org definitive Brexit Facts Index, to inform the debate
We have produced many hundreds of great, researched articles on all the Brexit subjects under the sun. Our new index will allow facts on every issue to be found easily.
  • The Facts4EU.Org Brexit Battle Pack
Recently launched in beta version to all our individual donors, we have taken on board all suggestions and will be releasing this to all readers in the coming days. This Pack gives you a variety of practical ways you can actually do something about Brexit, rather than just getting frustrated at the lack of progress and the Prime Minister’s ‘Wet Remain’ Chequers Plan.
  • Renewed approaches to other Brexit organisations
Once again we have approached other Brexit organisations to see whether we can combine forces. So far we have had some friendly replies, but as in the last 3 years it remains to be seen whether anything will happen. Watch this space.
Meanwhile, we will keep bringing you daily, original pieces about Brexit for as long as we can, until lack of funds finally drives us to stop.
       06.30am, 31 Aug 2018
SHARE THIS ARTICLE ONLINE
READERS' COMMENTS
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
Name: BrexMax, Kent, UK      Date/Time: 31 Aug 2018, 11.18am
Message: The Brexit Battle Pack looks great, I sent you some suggestions regarding this. Can't wait for the index, I hope you get there soon. I made you a small donation today, hoping to support you further maybe next month!
Reply: Thank you BrexMax!
Name: William Pentelow, Midlands, UK      Date/Time: 31 Aug 2018, 06.45am
Message: The index will be of tremendous help in putting remainers in their place. Well done, keep it up.
P.S. If everyone read your site a second referendum would see 95% vote for leave. Is there a way to promote the site further?
Reply: Thank you for the kind words, William. We'll reply again about your final question in a few minutes' time.
On promotion: If you post comments on other websites, please refer to us (Brexit Facts4EU.Org) and if possible put the link to the news page (http://facts4eu.org/news.shtml) or a link to the actual article you're referring to. If you use social media then forwarding one of our tweets or adding one of our charts to your own tweet is useful. It also helps us if you mention us to the large Brexit organisations, as some of them don't seem to want to register our existence! Similarly if you write to the media. Anything you can do to spread the word is good!
 THE EU ARMY
IN THE EU’S OWN WORDS
© EU Commission
LATEST FROM THE EU SHOWS THE REALITY OF THE
‘DANGEROUS FANTASY’ RIDICULED BY NICK CLEGG
This August, the EU has published a series of weekly articles about its Common Defence capabilities under the EU flag.
Regrettably this information has not been covered by any of the defence correspondents of the newspapers or the BBC, Sky News, or ITN. Maybe they were all on holiday.
Brexit Facts4EU.Org has researched and written many dozens of articles about ‘the EU Army’. This is our latest article, providing a summary of excerpts from the EU’s latest August series about defence and security. We let the EU speak for itself.
THE EU ARMY IN THE EU’S OWN WORDS
DIRECT QUOTES FROM THE EU’S
“SUMMER SERIES ON DEFENCE AND SECURITY”
August 2018
“Part 1: EU acts for peace and security”
“For centuries, Europe was a continent of war. However after the Second World War, the European Union has become a most successful peace project, being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2012. Today the EU's ambition is to be a global actor for peace more than ever.
A ‘progressive framing of a common Union defence policy’ is also foreseen in the Treaty on European Union.
The EU currently conducts six military missions and operations on land and sea
EU military and civilian missions and operations outside the Union: The security of EU citizens does not start at our borders
The EU has developed its track record as security provider through deploying civilian and military missions and operations under its Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP). The first missions under EU flag were launched already back in 2003. Since then 34 EU missions have operated on three continents.
The European Defence Fund: the EU needs a European Defence Industry to be a lasting and credible security provider
The Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO) is an instrument which enables willing Member States to pursue greater cooperation in defence and security. Out of the 28 EU Member States, 25 have joined PESCO and thereby agreed to more binding commitments in the defence domain.”
Soldiers under EU flag                 © EU Commission
“Part 2: EU Defence Cooperation - the crucial issue of mobility”
“Closer EU defence cooperation necessitates that Member States' Armed Forces are able to move within the Union.
Enhanced military mobility helps to protect the Union and its citizens. It also facilitates the deployment of EU military missions and operations in partner countries under the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP).”
“Part 3 - Permanent Structured Cooperation on Defence PESCO”
“Collaboration between participating EU Member States is no longer ad hoc, but formal, sustainable and binding. It is a framework and a structured process to gradually deepen defence cooperation
The majority of PESCO projects are linked to operational needs
the European Defence Fund will support certain projects financially
So far 17 projects have been adopted by participating Member States, covering a wide range of security issues. Further projects are due to follow towards the end of 2018.”
“Part 4 - The EU’s civilian missions around the world”
“Six EU military missions and operations are currently active in Europe's wider neighbourhood to support peace and security under the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP). These military missions and, more generally, recent progress on EU defence matters have often been in the forefront of public discussion. However, addressing complex security challenges in fragile partner countries also requires substantial civilian support and the EU has indeed currently ten civilian missions operating in the field.
Currently 2,000 women and men work in the ten civilian missions in third countries in Europe, Africa and the Middle East.
Civilian EU missions - part of an integrated EU approach to conflict and crisis
Civilian missions play a large and increasing role in the EU’s global engagement for peace and security.
Obviously civilian missions also work with EU military missions and operations where they are equally present in a country.
Also synergies and complementarity between civilian and military CSDP missions deployed in the same theatre will be further strengthened.”
- EU External Action Service (EEAS), Aug 2018
OBSERVATIONS
The EU started its August series on defence and security with the following words:
“For centuries, Europe was a continent of war. However after the Second World War, the European Union has become a most successful peace project, being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2012.”
Whenever defence and security are mentioned by the EU, they always manage to convey the impression that peace since WWII has been down to the EU rather than NATO.
The propaganda has been successful: huge numbers of Remainers actually believe this nonsense, particularly younger voters who have been taught a peculiar form of history. Apart from anything else, the European Union didn’t even exist until 1993, 48 years after the end of the Second World War.
THE FELLOW-TRAVELLERS
From its very beginnings the founding fathers of the ‘European Project’ embarked on a direction of travel. The goal was a United States of Europe. Naturally this included a common foreign and defence policy and common defence forces. This is widely documented and cannot be disputed.
Today we have the Italian former Communist Federica Mogherini as the EU’s de facto Foreign Secretary and Defence Secretary. In NATO we have the Norwegian former Communist Jens Stoltenberg as Secretary-General, who incidentally campaigned for Remain.
DOES THE EU HAVE ITS OWN ARMY YET?
Interestingly the EU doesn’t deny this. Instead it emphasises that military assets will currently stay under the control of individual member states. However it does not deny that an EU Army is the ultimate goal. Indeed, a Common Defence Policy is contained within the Treaty on European Union, and in the last two years progress in this field has been rapid.
FEDERICA MOGHERINI, EU VICE-PRESIDENT & DE FACTO DEFENCE CHIEF:
“Over this past year our common [EU] defence has advanced more than in the previous 60 years.”
- EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Official 2017 video
If military forces are active under the EU flag – which they are, by the EU’s own admission - then they’re part of an EU Army. Naturally we use the term ‘EU Army’ as shorthand for a combined military including land, air and sea power.
LEAVING OUR TROOPS ON THE BREXIT BATTLEFIELD?
There is no question in our minds that the current Prime Minister would leave the UK’s forces shackled to the EU on the UK’s supposed exit, unless we fight this.
As one of our friends at Veterans for Britain said recently:
“Cabinet Office officials are lining up a military treaty which would see a continuing and growing EU policy influence over the UK and continued UK involvement in EU military arrangements agreed by ministers in 2017 [post-Referendum - Ed] on the excuse that we’re leaving them in 2019.”
EU ARMY? SOUND-BITE TO REMEMBER :
“The first missions under EU flag were launched already back in 2003.
Since then 34 EU missions have operated on three continents.”
- EU’s ‘European External Action Service’, 24 August 2018
[ Sources: EU Commission ]        03.45am, 31 Aug 2018
SHARE THIS ARTICLE ONLINE
READERS' COMMENTS
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
Name: June A. Van Orman, UK      Date/Time: 01 Sep 2018, 12.46pm
Message: The EU has been building their army for many years. Our defence system is almost nil. Why? Because our Leaders have put us under the EU system and this way we are totally dependent on the EU to protect us, if and when they choose. Their military can also turn against us at anytime for the least reason. This is also why we must have BREXIT and our own military PDQ.
Name: Sydney Ashurst, UK      Date/Time: 31 Aug 2018, 11.02am
Message: With defence equipment procurement for the EU Army who will benefit most? Almost certainly France and Germany. Nicholas Soames is a silly billy, he believed Cameron who said the EU Army would never happen, when German MEP's already had plans in EU Parliament.
Name: William Pentelow, Midlands, UK      Date/Time: 31 Aug 2018, 06.48am
Message: "The security of EU citizens does not start at our borders"
It most certainly doesn't.

CAN YOU HELP US? - WE RELY 100% ON INDIVIDUAL DONATIONS
ANY CREDIT CARD USER
One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £5
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
PAYPAL USERS ONLY:
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
 WANT TO KNOW WHAT
YOUR £39 BILLION
BREXIT BILL IS PAYING FOR?
© EU Commission
TAKE A POLISH TRAIN IN LODZ
EU ANNOUNCES €0.4 BILLION
TO ALLEVIATE ‘INCONVENIENCE’ FOR POLES IN LODZ
On Tuesday the EU Commission approved €0.41 billion euros (£0.37 billion pounds) of expenditure for some railway improvements in the city of Lodz, Poland. Here is what the EU had to say.
“Łódź has two main stations: Łódź Fabryczna and Łódź Kaliska, which are currently not connected to each other. This is a major obstacle to the region’s transport development and an everyday inconvenience for those living in the city.”
- EU Regional & Urban Development Directorate, 28 Aug 2018
The latest funding from the EU for the train improvements, announced Tuesday, is €411 million euros (£370 million GBP) and the payment comes from the EU’s ‘Cohesion Fund’.
UK PAYS INTO EU’S £57 BILLION COHESION FUND BUT GETS NOTHING BACK
This is a €63.3 billion euro fund (£57 billion GDP) which the UK taxpayer helps to finance, but from which the UK is entitled to receive nothing. No grants, no loans, nothing.    [Source: EU Commission latest figures for 2017.]
The only countries permitted to receive the €63.3 billion are Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Greece, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia.
WHAT THE EU COMMISSIONER SAID
Here is what the responsible EU Commissioner says about the EU’s funding for the Lodz railway connection:-
“Soon, those living in the city will be able to get across town faster and will benefit from better interregional connections, with an effective and environmentally friendly transport system.”
- EU Commissioner for Regional Policy, Ms Corina Crețu from Bulgaria, 28 Aug 2018
POLAND’S RECEIPTS FROM THE COHESION FUND
Poland will receive a total of €23.2 billion from the Cohesion Fund. The project we referred to above is merely the latest one. On top of the £370 million just announced, the Polish city of Lodz has already received £218 million pounds from the Cohesion Fund for other railways upgrades.
That’s a total of £588 million pounds – almost £0.6 billion - for just one city in Poland. Imagine that replicated across Poland.
Then imagine it replicated across the EU.
OBSERVATIONS
British taxpayers are funding an underground connecting railway between Lodz’s two main railway stations.
We are told by the EU that this will alleviate “an everyday inconvenience for those living in the city”. If this comes at enormous cost to the citizens of another country such as the United Kingdom, who have to pay for it, then so be it.
We can only guess at the number of readers who would love to have the inconveniences in their own daily lives removed by the EU. Across the UK there will be readers asking why the groaning transport infrastructure in their own area shouldn’t be improved with ‘EU money’.
THE EU IS ALWAYS KEEN TO PROMOTE ITSELF IN EUROSCEPTIC COUNTRIES
Whenever the EU spends British taxpayer money in an EU country, it rushes to tell the people of the receiving country how munificent the great EU has been.
Never mind that it’s not ‘EU money’ at all. The EU never mentions the unknowing generosity of the taxpayers of the few member states who actually make a net contribution to the EU budget, of which the UK is the second-biggest.
The simple fact is that the railway improvements in Lodz will be plastered with EU plaques, saying ‘Funded by the European Union’. Because of this, there’ll be ne’er so much as a ‘dzięki’ (thanks) from the Polish people of Lodz, who will imagine the funds came from the great EU moneypot in the sky.
THE EU IS LESS KEEN FOR THE BRITISH PUBLIC TO KNOW ABOUT THIS
We have pointed out to readers many times before that whenever the EU wants to keep a low profile as far as British people are concerned, the EU Commission announces the news in French or German. This pretty much ensures that the no other Brexit organisations nor the British press will pick it up.
In this case, the news was announced in French. And sure enough Brexit Facts4EU.Org is the only news organisation to report this.
Standard caveat: This article isn't about Polish people. After all, they would be mad to turn down all this free 'EU money'. Many other EU countries receive money for projects like the one above. This just happened to be the latest and it involved Poland.
Finally, if we wrapped up our work today, who else would bring you such compelling facts to show Remainer MPs why they must deliver a full, clean Brexit or face disturbing consequences for the country and unemployment for themselves? Please, please donate something to help keep us going.
[ Sources: EU Commission ]        06.55am, 30 Aug 2018
SHARE THIS ARTICLE ONLINE
READERS' COMMENTS
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
Name: Allan, SW England (but originally from the north east), UK      Date/Time: 30 Aug 2018, 6.38pm
Message: Have we ever been full members of the EU as all I've ever seen is successive governments cherry picking which parts of EU law and regulation they want to accept. The ones they do accept always seem to have a loophole, opt out or suchlike. I was reading an article on scallops fishing where the French and Brits can't even agree on the start and finish dates for the season but only because the British season is the longest. You can bet if it was the other way around it would never have been a problem. Why don't the government knuckle down and sort Brexit out or at least start addressing the reasons Leave won the referendum, at present all we hear is he lied, she lied, they lied, they had a bus, Labour are anti-semitic, Austerity is good, May was a staunch remainer now she's Leave's greatest advocate. Let's get it sorted, we want the best for the country not the best for the politicians.

CAN YOU HELP US? - WE RELY 100% ON INDIVIDUAL DONATIONS
ANY CREDIT CARD USER
One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £5
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
PAYPAL USERS ONLY:
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
 DO REMAINER MPs APPROVE OF
UK SUBSIDISING EU COUNTRIES?
© EU Commission
BREXIT FACTS4EU.ORG - QUESTIONS TO REMAINER MPs
  • Why should we pay for EU27 train stations?
  • Why don’t Remainer MPs demand they should have a vote on this spending?
  • And why couldn’t the EU have cut back, following the Brexit vote?
CAN REMAINER MPs PLEASE EXPLAIN ALL THIS
TO THE BRITISH PEOPLE?
As with all EU funds which the UK is expected to keep paying for, most of the EU’s ‘Cohesion Fund’ hasn’t yet been spent.
To remind readers, the EU’s Cohesion Fund amounts to €63.3 billion euros (£57 billion pounds) and the UK pays for part of this but doesn’t get one penny back.
In the article above we described how the EU has just announced that it’s spending £370 million to reduce ‘inconvenience’ for rail passengers in one city in Poland.
HOW MUCH OF THIS FUND HAS BEEN ALLOCATED OR SPENT?
A key question which Brexit Facts4EU.Org has asked on many occasions, is how much of the EU’s programme (which it insists the UK must keep paying for) has actually been decided upon? How much could it cut back on?
The EU is demanding a headline figure of £39 billion pounds as a ‘financial settlement’ for Brexit. Inexplicably Theresa May has agreed to this amount in principle, despite there being no legal justification to pay anything at all.
It would seem reasonable to ask how much of the EU’s planned use for the funds provided by the UK taxpayer have actually been used. And if the funds haven’t been used, why isn’t the EU scaling back?
LET’S TAKE THE EU’S £57 BILLION COHESION FUND AS AN EXAMPLE
BREXIT FACTS4EU.ORG SUMMARY - EU’S COHESION FUND
  • TOTAL FUND : £57 billion (100%)
  • ‘DECIDED’ : £36.4 billion (64%)
  • OF WHICH, SPENT : £8.6 billion (15%)
  • UNALLOCATED : £20.6 billion (36%)
© Facts4EU.Org 2018
85% of the money hasn’t yet been spent. Critically, 36% of the Fund still hasn’t even been allocated to projects. That’s £20.6 billion unallocated.
If we go back to the time of the Referendum, less than 75% had been allocated. That’s over £39 billion which hadn't been unallocated from this one EU fund alone.
Coincidentally, £39 billion is the sum which the EU is demanding from the UK as a divorce bill.
OBSERVATIONS
If the EU had put this fund on hold following the Referendum, it would have saved £39 billion – the sum it is demanding from the UK as a ‘financial settlement’. Even if it puts the remaining fund on hold now, 2 years later, it would still save £20 billion.
Remember, the projects in this Cohesion Fund are ‘nice to have’ rather than essential. And the UK is excluded from the list of recipients from the fund.
Would it hurt the citizens of Lodz in Poland to continue to walk between the two main stations or take a bus or taxi as at present? Could a Remainer MP please explain why British taxpayers should fund an easy life for the people of Lodz for decades after the UK has left the EU, when there are apparently no funds to improve the appalling situation for British train users right across the UK?
Or if the people of Lodz feel they really need these railway improvements in their city to reduce their ‘inconvenience’, perhaps they could persuade the Polish government to pay for them?
THE COHESION FUND IS ONLY 13% OF TOTAL EU STRUCTURAL FUNDS
This EU Cohesion Fund represents only 13% of all the funds contained within its “European Structural & Investment Fund’ (ESIF).
If after the Referendum the EU had applied the same caution to all the ESIF funds and stopped thinking up new projects to spend money on, it would have had over £250 billion to play with.
In the article above, Brexit Facts4EU.Org gave readers a classic example of how their money is being spent by the EU. The money - £370 million for just one project to improve railways in one Polish city – comes from the EU’s Cohesion Fund.
BREXIT FACTS4EU.ORG SUMMARY
  • Up to the end of 2017, only 15% of the EU’s Cohesion Fund had been spent.
  • They haven’t even yet decided how to spend 36% of this fund
  • That’s £20.6 billion (pounds) which hasn’t even been decided upon
  • This is equivalent to the extra NHS spending that the British government has committed to
  • Or put another way, the EU could reduce its spending by £20 billion
QUESTIONS FOR REMAINER MPs
We have yet to hear a Remainer MP explain to the British people that they are subsidising life in EU27 countries to the tune of billions of pounds. We can’t recall the British public ever being asked for their permission.
And we have yet to hear a Remainer MP complain that they don’t have ‘parliamentary scrutiny’ over the use of these billions of pounds, decided upon and spent by the unelected EU Commission. Whilst the UK is a member of the EU, MPs have no say whatsoever.
We invite any Remainer MP to respond.
Statistical note: The EU’s many funds, like the Cohesion Fund that we have highlighted, are expressed over their budget lifetimes. The current lifetime is 2014-2020, which covers the period of the UK’s exit. The figures above use the EU’s own data, which uses this timeframe.
[ Sources: EU Commission ]        06.55am, 30 Aug 2018
SHARE THIS ARTICLE ONLINE
READERS' COMMENTS
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
Donate to Facts4EU.Org today
and you will be backing a great cause
  • Great research, fascinating facts, revealing charts
  • Punchy and stimulating content which resonates with people
  • Trusted by thousands of campaigners before the Referendum
  • The only site to keep going normally on June 24th 2016 and daily thereafter
  • A talented and dedicated editorial team
  • We produce original work – not a list of links to newspaper stories
Our work influences and is used by politicians and mainstream journalists - what we do matters
We're desperate for more financial support.
Can you help to keep us going?
ANY CREDIT CARD USER
One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £5
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
PAYPAL USERS ONLY:
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
WE'RE REALLY GRATEFUL TO OUR RECENT SUPPORTERS.
UNFORTUNATELY THIS REPRESENTS A QUARTER OF WHAT WE NEED TO SURVIVE. CAN YOU HELP?
(Anonymity respected completely if you prefer to remain private)
       Best regards, the Facts4EU.Org Team
 GERMANY TAKES
“2ND-MOST GENEROUS NATION”
AWARD FROM THE UK
© Facts4EU.Org 2018
THANKS TO 37-FOLD RISE IN IN-COUNTRY MIGRANT COSTS
How Germany now looks more generous than the UK in ‘foreign aid’,
by spending 26% of it in Germany, on the cost of migrants
When Brexit Facts4EU.Org first started reporting on foreign aid in relation to EU membership, the UK was officially the second-highest donor in the world, after the USA. Our data came from the official body for these things: the OECD, based in Paris.
Now Germany is 2nd and the UK is 3rd. The reasons are fairly simple:
In its ‘foreign aid’ totals, the German government includes the spiralling costs of dealing with migrants WITHIN Germany itself.
It has also had to spend more on migrant-source countries, to slow the numbers arriving.
© Facts4EU.Org 2018
The above chart shows how Germany’s ‘foreign aid’ has rocketed in the last few years. From $12.5bn in 2013 it had risen to $24.74bn by 2016, the last year for which full and final data is available.
HOW AND WHY HAS GERMANY OVERTAKEN THE UK SO RAPIDLY?
The main reason for Germany’s sudden rise, stealing second place from the UK in the ‘most generous nation’ awards, is that Germany is including some of the massive costs it is incurring as a result of welcoming enormous numbers of migrants into its country since 2014.
Below we show - exclusively - the amounts that Germany has included and which are being spent inside Germany, to deal with the influx of migrants caused by Frau Merkel’s ‘all welcome here’ announcement in 2015.
© Facts4EU.Org 2018
IS THIS ALLOWED?
Bizarrely it is within the OECD’s rules for Germany to add the monies it is spending within the country, to the monies it spends on what most people consider as ‘foreign aid’. However the extent to which this has been done has raised eyebrows in the corridors of the OECD’s luxurious Paris headquarters.
The OECD commented:
“In the last two years, many DAC (Development Assistance Committee of OECD) members have faced unprecedented inflows of refugees and migrants. The DAC is examining how to best deliver whole-of-government approaches, so as to preserve aid budgets, as well as improve the consistency, comparability and transparency of ODA reporting of these costs.”
In the official report of the UK government department in overall charge of foreign aid, DFID concluded:
“In 2016 Germany was the second largest donor country after the US due to their ODA spend on in-donor refugee costs doubling between 2015 and 2016.”
BUT DOESN’T THE UK GOVERNMENT ALSO INCLUDE IN-COUNTRY MIGRANT COSTS?
The UK government includes a small element for the cost of welcoming migrants to the UK, as readers can see from the chart above. However the scale is entirely different to that of the German government.
BREXIT FACTS4EU.ORG SUMMARY
PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL AID FOR IN-COUNTRY MIGRANTS
  • In 2016 the UK’s percentage of total aid in respect of in-country costs was 3.2%
  • Germany’s was 26.6%
  • That’s over 8 times higher than the UK
  • And Germany's 'aid' expenditure in Germany on migrants has grown 37 times in just 3 years
OBSERVATIONS
There are three main points to this Brexit Facts4EU.Org report:
  1. The enormous rise in apparent German government generosity when it comes to aid should be treated with the utmost caution. This has happened since Frau Merkel’s government started relaxing their approach to migrants. The ‘in-country’ expenditure declared does not include other ‘aid’ which Germany has incurred as part of its attempts to control the inlow of migrants.
  2. The in-country costs of Merkel’s rash migrant policy are beginning to be felt by the German economy. The above figures of approximately $6bn per year included in Germany’s ‘aid’ total are only a small proportion of the total costs they are experiencing, but these do at least give an indication.
  3. The EU continues to claim that “The EU is the most generous donor in the world”, when you can see quite clearly that the EU institutions come 4th, after the USA, Germany, and the UK.
WHY DO WE TALK ABOUT ‘FOREIGN AID’?
It is clear from the OECD’s reports over the past 3 years that it is acutely aware of the gross distortions caused by huge in-country migrant costs being included in aid figures by Germany (and some others like Sweden). It hopes this problem will go away before it has to act against one of its biggest paymasters.
The OECD refers to “Official Development Assistance”, or ODA, and not 'foreign aid'. This is precisely because the OECD forms part of the elite group of unelected organisations which govern many aspects of our lives. Staff regularly have time on their CV at more than one of these organisations, which all offer virtually tax-free salaries, resettling and living allowances, and other perks.
It is convenient for some governments – and institutions such as the EU – to ask the OECD for as broad a definition as possible for what ordinary people still think is actually ‘foreign aid’.
In this case, the German government has secured a PR victory in becoming “the world’s 2nd-largest donor” when in fact it is delivering over a quarter of this aid in its own country. Naturally this has benefits for the German economy, compared to spending the money in a country like Syria as the UK does.
BREXIT FACTS4EU.ORG SUMMARY
AID EXPENDITURE - UK AND GERMANY
  • The German government has included its in-country spend on its migrant crisis in its ‘aid’ figures
  • This element has grown by over 37 times in 3 years
  • The EU continues to pretend it’s the most generous aid donor in the world
  • In fact it’s 4th, and all the money comes from the few net contributors to the EU’s budget anyway – such as the UK
Statistical note: Figures come from the OECD, which is the official body for what is now called “Official Development Assistance” (ODA). We have used the latest ‘final’ data which relates to 2016 and which shows the in-country donor costs by nation.
[ Sources: OECD | EU Commission | DFID ]        06.55am, 29 Aug 2018
SHARE THIS ARTICLE ONLINE
READERS' COMMENTS
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
Name: Brexiteer, Braintree, Essex, UK      Date/Time: 29 Aug 2018, 09.47am
Message: Perhaps we should at some stage review how the generous British Foreign Aid is distributed. Foreign Aid is rarely distributed for individual aid projects in countries, it is given to NGO aid organisations. Or corrupt local politicians in third world countries who squander the monies on private jets etc. The same NGO organisations stuffed full of failed politicians on highly inflated salaries, those same organisations who admitted sexual exploitation of vulnerable children during their aid work. The same NGO organisations who lobby Parliament for monies for their aid work. Foreign Aid is now a major business industry and should be treated as such. Billions of pounds of taxpayers' money is involved with little regard as to how it is spent. A review of the whole "Aid" industry is long overdue.

CAN YOU HELP US? - WE RELY 100% ON INDIVIDUAL DONATIONS
ANY CREDIT CARD USER
One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £5
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
PAYPAL USERS ONLY:
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
 MAY’S ARRIVAL IN SOUTH AFRICA FAILS TO MAKE LOCAL NEWS
© EU Commission
THERESA MAY SAYS POST-BREXIT FOREIGN AID WILL CHANGE
Theresa May is in South Africa today, giving a keynote speech regarding the UK’s £13.4 billion foreign aid budget and post-Brexit policies.
MAY TO ADDRESS THE AID DEBATE
In her speech in Cape Town today, British Prime Minister Theresa May will announce that the post-Brexit UK will aim to align its foreign aid more closely with the UK’s national interests. She will say:
“I am unashamed about the need to ensure that our aid programme works for the UK. So today I am committing that our development spending will not only combat extreme poverty, but at the same time tackle global challenges and support our own national interest. This will ensure that our investment in aid benefits us all, and is fully aligned with our wider national security priorities.”
- Theresa May's speech in South Africa today
It appears that she will say nothing about the UK’s foreign aid money which is sent to the EU for it to spend, and for which it claims the credit.
MAY’S AFRICAN SAFARI
Mrs May will also state that the UK aims to be the biggest foreign investor in the African continent from the G7, surpassing the USA. In 2016 UK companies invested £55 billion, marginally behind the US by only £2 billion, so this is not a difficult target to achieve.
After South Africa, Mrs May will visit other African countries including Kenya and Nigeria. This article therefore looks at Africa as a whole rather than just South Africa, which Mrs May is visiting today.
BRITISH AID TO AFRICA
Over half of all bilateral British aid (‘Official Development Assistance’) went to Africa in 2016. The total spent directly was £2.9 billion. This does NOT include all the British ‘multilateral’ aid to Africa which is channelled through the EU, the UN, and the IMF.
According to the latest 2017 report from DFID:
“Africa continues to account for the largest percentage share of UK bilateral ODA expenditure allocated to specific country or region. Africa received approximately £2.9 billion (51.0 per cent) of bilateral ODA spend in 2016.”
- DFID Report 2017
BRITISH AID TO AFRICA UP BY 32% IN 5 YEARS
© Facts4EU.Org 2018
The UK’s bilateral foreign aid spend in Africa in 2016 (£2.9 billion) was 31.7% higher than it was 5 years ago, in 2012 (£2.2 billion).
BRITISH AID CLAIMED BY THE EU
In 2016, the UK gave £1.5 billion (£1,504 million) to the EU for it to spend on the UK’s behalf. The EU then claimed this money as its own expenditure on foreign aid.
A proportion of this UK taxpayers’ money will have gone to South Africa, where Theresa May is speaking today. This is in addition to the UK’s bilateral aid to South Africa, as we have already stated.
MAY HAS NO PLANS TO RAISE COMMUNIST TILT OF SOUTH AFRICAN REGIME
As we have extensively reported in the last year, the South African government has passed laws approving the expropriation of land owned by white farmers, without compensation. This extraordinary move makes South Africa a pariah state in terms of international standards, but so far the British government has failed to condemn it.
OBSERVATIONS
It is clear that Mrs May is engaged on a foreign tour to try to shore up her support within the Conservative Party, ahead of their conference in a month’s time.
There is considerable unease across the country about the enormous sum of £13.4 billion which was spent on foreign aid in 2016, and which will have increased when the next figures are published.
The UK is one of the very few countries in the world to spend 0.7% of GDP on foreign aid. Rather than abandon this target, it seems Mrs May will make soothing noises and say that aid will be linked to the interests of British companies involved in the region.
Without any specific measures being announced, it is hard to see how this will pacify the party faithful.
THE EU AND SOUTH AFRICA
The EU has been very active in South Africa in the last 10 years but has also failed to condemn the atrocities taking place, which include weekly attacks and murders of white farmers, all egged on by the EFF party in the South African parliament.
Earlier this year we reported in detail on the EU’s agreement with South Africa and its neighbours. We will soon publish an updated version of this.
MAY MAKES NO IMPACT ON SOUTH AFRICANS
Finally, readers might be interested to know that the South African Broadcasting Corporation makes absolutely no mention of the visit of Theresa May to their country today. (Information correct as of 4.20am, Tuesday 28 August 2018.)
[ Sources: EU Commission | DFID | SABC ]        07.10am, 28 Aug 2018
SHARE THIS ARTICLE ONLINE
READERS' COMMENTS
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
Name: Paul A, East Sussex, UK      Date/Time: 28 Aug 2018, 5.41pm
Message: So, let me get this straight... Is Traitor May now giving our tax money to both the eu and the same South African Government who are both dispossessing and killing white farmers?
Name: Sibelius Fan, West Midlands, UK      Date/Time: 28 Aug 2018, 4.47pm
Message: Come on people, can't we get this petition up to 100,000 before it closes on September 2nd? The petition says
"Ensure that the U.K. leaves the EU Single Market & Customs Union."
"On 23rd June 2016, the U.K. voted by majority to leave the EU. In the 2017 General Election, the two main parties promised to leave the single market amp; customs union and subsequently they received an 80% vote share. Therefore the government must be able to withdraw the U.K. from the Customs Union."
Here is the link.
We only have a few days to get it up to 100,000. Currently it has 81,028 signatures.

CAN YOU HELP US? - WE RELY 100% ON INDIVIDUAL DONATIONS
ANY CREDIT CARD USER
One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £5
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
PAYPAL USERS ONLY:
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
 THE EU IS NOT A COUNTRY
IT’S AN INSTITUTION
© EU Commission
AND IT LIES CONTINUOUSLY
Sometimes it’s important to state the blindingly obvious. One important example of this principle concerns the very nature of the EU.
All across Europe, people have been rising up against the EU’s ideology that it is a country and that the nation state in Europe is an outdated concept.
Never more clearly was this shown than in the result of the UK’s 2016 Referendum on EU membership, when 17.4 million people – the largest mandate in UK political history – rose up to defy the Establishment and declare they wanted their independence back.
THE EU FIGHTING THE TRUTH
The elites in Brussels have been fighting a rearguard action ever since. They despise the whole idea of nation states because the entire premise of the EU ‘Projekt’ is to combine all members into one superstate.
This is not an opinion, it’s a fact. It has been demonstrated from the statements of leaders from the inception of the original European Coal and Steel Community in 1951, through the birth of the EEC in 1957, to the establishment of the EU in 1993.
This is why readers see EU Commission President Juncker and EU Council President Tusk - as well as a wide variety of europhile politicians on both sides of the channel - denouncing ‘populists’ and ‘nationalists’ on a continual basis.
EXAMPLE OF THE GREAT EU LIE
A generation of young British people have been brought up to believe that the EU is their country. This simply isn’t the case. The EU is an administrative institution – or more accurately a set of institutions – which pretends to be a country but is in fact just a bureaucratic morass.
The EU is a framework supposedly representing the interests of 28 countries, soon to be 27. It does not have the status of a country. The United States of America is a country. China is a country. Japan is a country. The EU is not. Not yet, anyway.
Despite this, the EU has for years been pretending that it has country status. A great example of this is the way it claims to be the world’s biggest donor of international aid.
BREXIT FACTS4EU.ORG SUMMARY
EU’S BIG FAT LIE
“The EU is the most generous donor in the world.”
- Opening sentence on EU's aid website
  • EU claims to be world’s largest aid donor
  • It claims to provide 56.7% of the world’s aid
  • In fact it gives $17.1 billion in aid
  • The UK gives $18.1 billion in aid – 6% more than the EU
© Facts4EU.Org 2018
The fact is that the EU institutions combined donate less than the UK on its own.
The EU makes its erroneous claim by taking the individual sovereign foreign aid budgets of the 28 EU member states, and adds them to the amount it donates out of its own budget (which is paid for by the 9 EU members who make a net contribution). It then claims the total as its own.
The individual governments of the 28 countries of the EU make their own decisions about foreign aid - nothing to do with the EU. There is no basis on which the EU can claim any credit for this. But they do it anyway.
OBSERVATIONS
One aspect of the Remoaner argument relies on the false premise that the UK is somehow a minor player in the world. Millions of British people now appear to believe this is true, to some extent, thanks to the educators in our schools and universities, and to the luvvies in the media.
The reality is of course that the UK is officially the 5th largest economy in the world according to the IMF. It holds one of only 5 permanent seats on the UN Security Council. It is a member of the G7, the G20, it was a founding member of the WTO, and it is a nuclear power.
The EU has naturally used its propaganda resources to downplay the importance of member states such as the UK, whilst at the same time producing figures which show that “the EU” tops some table or other.
The simple fact is that the EU is not (yet) a country. The UK can hold its head up high on the world stage. And it can certainly compete with everyone out there – including the 27 countries who will remain members of the EU.
Perhaps we need to remind our young people of facts like those above on a regular basis.
[ Sources: EU Commission ]        07.10am, 28 Aug 2018
SHARE THIS ARTICLE ONLINE
READERS' COMMENTS
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
WE PROVIDE FACTS
AND WITH YOU
WE MAKE A DIFFERENCE
We are a committed and determined team.
You haven't given up fighting for a clean Brexit.
Together we're up against a vast army of UK & EU propagandists.
Brexit Facts4EU.Org is an influential pro-Brexit news organisation read by MPs, MEPs, mainstream journalists, eurocrats, MPs and Senators from the EU, USA, Australia and other countries.
Do you still have the determination to get the Brexit you voted for? Or in fact more than ever before?
To the right: Articles in the national press,
all of which came from Brexit Facts4EU.Org.
 
We’re committed and tireless, but we wouldn’t be here to report and fight without our supporters.
If you’re like-minded, please join our readership. If you're already 'in-the-club' we'd like to take the opportunity to send you a big thank you for all your support.
All we have here are our honest tools - research, compelling daily content, simple charts - and our most important resource - YOU.
We badly need your help to keep going, fighting for a full, clean Brexit.

ANY CREDIT CARD USER
One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £5
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
PAYPAL USERS ONLY:
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
WE'RE REALLY GRATEFUL TO OUR SUPPORTERS.
UNFORTUNATELY WE ONLY RECEIVE A QUARTER OF WHAT WE NEED TO SURVIVE. CAN YOU HELP?
(Anonymity respected completely if you prefer to remain private)
       Best regards, the Facts4EU.Org Team, 2018
 NO ‘EU TRADE DEALS IN PLACE’
WITH TOP 10 WORLD ECONOMIES
- FROM EU COMMISSION’S OWN INFORMATION
THE EU’S TRADE DEALS IN PLACE – PART 1
JUST WHO ARE THE EU'S TRADE DEALS WITH?
On Saturday we showed readers the following:-
All but 1 of the EU27 rely on the EU’s internal market for the majority of their exports
The EU constantly overstates what it does in facilitating trade for its member states
Today Brexit Facts4EU.Org brings you a summary analysis of the 36 global trade deals which the EU claims to have in place. Our research shows that :-
BREXIT FACTS4EU.ORG SUMMARY
EU’S ‘TRADE DEALS IN PLACE’
  • None of the deals are with top 10 world economies
  • 3 of these deals aren’t trade deals at all
  • 3 are with micro-states which are in effect part of EU member states
  • 6 are with pre-accession Balkan countries to whom the EU has given £6 billion as part of the deal
  • Only 24 deals might possibly be considered ‘arms length’
  • And these 24 countries account for only 8% of world GDP
© Facts4EU.Org 2018
The 9 countries in the top 50 with whom the EU has a trade deal in place are: South Korea, Mexico, Turkey, Switzerland, Norway, Israel, South Africa, Chile, and Egypt.
Brexit Facts4EU.Org has read many of these ‘agreements’. Thanks to our research we can question some of the 36 trade deals the EU claims to have in place and we can also question the value of them.
ANALYSIS OF THE EU’S 12 ‘DODGY DEALS’
3 countries on the EU’s list of ‘trade deals in place’ can be deleted immediately.
These are ‘Partnership and Cooperation Agreements’ with no effect on tariffs according to the EU. Neither are they trade agreements lodged with the World Trade Organisation. The countries concerned are Armenia, Azerbaijan and Russia.
This brings the EU’s total down to 33 trade deals.
Then there are the 3 agreements are with micro-states which are effectively part of EU countries: Andorra, Faroe Islands, and San Marino. These can hardly count as free trade deals with foreign countries.
To give an illustration, President Macron of France is the Prince of Andorra – the role comes with the French presidency. The IMF doesn’t even list Andorra’s GDP separately on its long list of countries.
Not only are these ‘deals’ virtually worthless because these micro-states are so tiny, they shouldn’t even be counted because they are to all intents and purposes part of EU member states.
This brings the EU’s total down to 30 trade deals.
Then there are 6 “Stabilisation and Association Agreements” for the 6 Balkan countries hoping to join the EU.
These are with Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Macedonia, Montenegro, and Serbia. These agreements are part of the process of accession to membership of the EU.
EU is paying £6.1 billion to these countries as ‘pre-accession assistance’ in the EU’s current budget to 2020. It will then pay more than £6 billion in the next EU budget from 2020.
The question must be asked to what extent these can be classified as proper trade deals when the countries concerned have signed a pre-accession agreement with the EU, of which trade is only one part, and the countries are being paid as part of the deal.
Without these 6 countries the EU’s list of ‘trade deals in force’ comes down from 30 to 24.
NOTES ON 9 MORE COUNTRIES IN THE EU’S LIST
6 agreements are ‘Economic Partnership Agreements’ with African states, which only came into force in February. They were effectively negotiated as one deal but we’ll let these stand as 6 deals.
3 further agreements are with countries which are part of the EEA (European Economic Area): Iceland, Norway, and Switzerland. All EU member states are part of the EEA, but we’ll let these stand in terms of the EU total.
OBSERVATIONS
SO WHERE DOES THIS LEAVE THE EU’S ‘36 TRADE DEALS IN PLACE’?
Removing the 3 non-trade deals (with Armenia, Azerbaijan and Russia), and the 3 ‘deals’ with micro-states which are in effect part of EU member states (Andorra, Faroe Islands, and San Marino), and the 6 pre-accession deals with West Balkans countries who are being paid to join the EU:-
The EU’s total of real arm’s length trade agreements in place falls from 36 to 24.
In Part 2 below, we look at the value of these deals, as well as the reasons why the EU Commission has been so bad at trade in the last 60 years.
Please do support us with a donation today if you can.
[ Sources: EU Commission | IMF ]        07.10am, 27 Aug 2018
SHARE THIS ARTICLE ONLINE
READERS' COMMENTS
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
Name: Not Convinced, UK      Date/Time: 28 Aug 2018, 09.49am
Message: This article is quite simply wrong. Is the statement that the EU has no trade agreements with the worlds top 10 economies true? To start with, 4 of the top 10 economies are members of the EU. So as members of the single market, they do have trade deals in place with the EU. What about the rest? 1. USA - there are a number of bilateral trade agreements in place, but no FTA after TTIP failed in 2016. 2. China - EU is China's largest trading partner, but no FTA. 3. Japan- FTA recently agreed with EU 4. Germany - EU member 5. UK - EU member 6. France - EU member 7. India - negotiations for an FTA have been ongoing since 2007. 8. Italy - EU member 9. Brazil - negotiations ongoing as part of Mercosur countries 10. Canada - CETA (an FTA) agreed in 2014 and now almost fully in force. So it would appear that your source is comprehensively, bollocks. Of the world's top 10 economies, 4 are members of the EU, 2 have FTAs agreed with the EU, and 3 others are in negotiation.
Reply: We disagree. Firstly, we used the EU's own list of trade agreements in place and our facts are correct. The EU doesn't count EU members and nor does the WTO. EU members don't have a trade deal with the EU. They are part of a customs union. That removes Germany, UK, France and Italy from your argument. Japan - if you read the article it's clear this isn't included because the deal isn't yet in place and neither is Canada's. The other countries you mention also don't have deals in place and are therefore not on the EU's list. So that takes them out of your argument. We made it very clear that the article is about "deals in place", according to the EU. You said "So it would appear that your source is comprehensively, bollocks." Putting aside your unnecessary rudeness, the source is the EU itself. Perhaps you could tell them your opinion of them rather than telling us.
Finally, you miss the overall point that after decades the EU has performed abysmally in securing trade deals with the world's largest economies. You seem to have fixated on the Top 10 and have conveniently forgotten all the other points we made. If you seriously think that deals with countries like Lesotho, Moldova, and Swaziland - all on the EU's list - represent value for money from the EU, then we can't help you.
Name: Bryan, Wales      Date/Time: 27 Aug 2018, 10.59am
Message: As, when making trade deals the EU used UK market access in its negotiations, then surely now that we are leaving any such trade deals will need to be renegotiated? If you said to me "Give me £10 and I will give you a bike". If you then produced a bike with no wheels I would want my £10 back. Or at least a % of it.

CAN YOU HELP US? - WE RELY 100% ON INDIVIDUAL DONATIONS
ANY CREDIT CARD USER
One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £5
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
PAYPAL USERS ONLY:
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
 EU HAS NO TRADE DEALS IN PLACE WITH 92% OF WORLD ECONOMY
© Facts4EU.Org 2018
- FROM EU COMMISSION’S OWN FIGURES
THE EU’S TRADE DEALS IN PLACE – PART 2
PUTTING ASIDE THE NUMBER OF EU TRADE DEALS, WHAT ARE THEY WORTH?
Regardless of how many ‘trade deals in place’ that the EU wants to claim, an important aspect of all of this is of course the value of these deals. So just how big are the countries on the list? And how much of the world economy do they cover?
BREXIT FACTS4EU.ORG SUMMARY
VALUE OF EU TRADE DEALS IN PLACE
  • EU’s ‘trade deals in place’ cover only 8% of the world economy
  • Average GDP ranking of these countries is 87th in the world
Source: EU Commission data, Aug 2018
Putting aside the questions over all the deals we have looked at in the article above, let’s go back to the EU’s original list of 36.
If we only exclude Russia, Armenia and Azerbaijan in the EU's list, which do not have a trade deal with the EU...
The remaining 33 countries only represent 8% of world GDP
With an average ranking of 87th in the world in terms of GDP, it is clear that the EU’s list contains few of the major economies. In many ways it is easier to name the countries whose economies appear in the top 50, rather than all those large economies that don't. These are South Korea, Mexico, Turkey, and Switzerland.
OBSERVATIONS
We must stress that we’ve used the EU Commission’s own list of ‘trade deals in place’, as at 26 August 2018. Regular readers know that we try to use the EU’s own official information where available, because this cannot then be contested by Remainer MPs.
We have produced this analysis because Remainer MPs regularly tell the British public that one of the supposed catastrophies of Brexit will be the loss of the EU’s current trade deals.
Putting aside the fact that Liam Fox’s Department for International Trade should have no problem replicating any of these deals if they want to, we thought it would be useful to see how many EU deals are in place, and what they’re worth.
As readers can see, the EU’s achievements in doing world trade deals over 60 years is hardly what might be called impressive.
THE EU STOPS ITS MEMBERS DOING THEIR OWN TRADE DEALS
International trade is an area of ‘exclusive competence’ for the EU Commission. This means that only the Commission can implement trade policy and negotiate trade deals.
This is a very important point to recognise. The EU Commission is always looking to add more ‘exclusive competences’ to its list of areas which impact on the lives of citizens of its member states. It is, in effect, engaged in a permanent process of grabbing more power for itself, with the aim of becoming a supranational power.
This leads on to the obvious question…
WHY IS THE EU SO BAD AT DOING INTERNATIONAL TRADE?
In its 60+years of existence the EEC/EU has failed to put in place trade deals with the most important economies of the world. Whilst it is now trying to play catch-up – having been ridiculed on this as part of the UK’s Referendum campaign by ourselves and others – the results are still woeful.
We would suggest 3 main reasons why the EU performs so badly.
1. Lack of Interest
The EU simply hasn’t been interested in international trade over the years. It cares more about growing itself and imposing more and more rules over peoples’ lives.
If readers would like an illustration of this, we only have to look at the EU’s unelected Trade Commissioner: Cecilia Malmstrom.
EU's Trade Commissioner, visiting Botswana    © EU Commission
The unelected Ms Malmstrom is a woman who was appointed by Jean-Claude Juncker to the trade job, with no trade experience.
You read that right. She really doesn’t have any trade experience: Take a look at her CV here.
It’s one thing for a minister to be appointed to a job he or she has no experience of, but Ms Malmstrom is a bureaucrat – a functionary. Can you imagine the board of a major corporation appointing a director to run its export department, who only had experience in social work, like Ms Malmstrom?
2. The EU is Inward-Looking
Remainer MPs are fond of dismissing the 17.4 million people who voted to leave the EU as ‘Little Englanders’. The irony is that it has always been the EU that has had an introspective attitude, and it is Remainer MPs who seem to think the world stops at the external borders of the EU.
Brexiteers are the ones who are looking outward and who are looking forward to embracing all four corners of the world.
For the last 60 years the EU apparatchiks have been more concerned with their ‘Projekt’ to unify all member states into one superstate, than in prioritising matters which affect the prosperity of the citizens of those countries.
‘Ever Closer Union’ remains the EU’s objective. Since the Referendum the EU has embarked on a flurry of activity and propaganda about trade, mainly because its record was so lamentable. This was shown up by us and others in the Referendum campaign. Suddenly, their failures in international trade had become an embarrassment.
This helps to explain why the two deals with Canada and Japan – which are still not ratified and completed – have been given so much airtime. The EU even prematurely announced the Japan deal last year, when it was nowhere near complete, as we reported at the time. It announced it again a couple of months ago, and no doubt it will announce it again whenever it finally comes into force.
3. Roquefort and Champagne
When the EU tries to make a trade deal, it wants to impose all manner of conditions on the other country. This helps to explain why it has targeted smaller countries who sometimes have to agree to the EU’s spurious demands, because they are so keen to get a trade deal.
We have read through the text of deals where there are conditions in relation to climate change policies of the other government, for example.
Perhaps the perfect illustration of how the EU does not represent the interests of the UK can be seen from the EU parliament’s remarks about trade last week. In a long piece, they started by saying:
“Trade agreements are not only an opportunity to reduce tariffs, but also to get our partners to recognise EU quality and safety standards, and to respect products with a protected designation of origin, such as champagne or roquefort cheese. This is very important as European food products enjoy a worldwide reputation for excellence and tradition.”
The two examples of protectionism given by the EU Parliament are French agricultural products.
WHEN IT COMES TO TRADE DEALS, THE UK WILL DEFINITELY BE BETTER OFF OUT
All of this helps to explain why the EU typically takes an average of 7 years to conclude a trade deal – and some negotiations have dragged on for decades without agreement.
When the UK finally negotiates its own trade deals, it will do so according to the national interest. And we very much hope it will conclude them in around 2 years, as countries like Australia and Singapore do.
Please do support us with a donation today if you can.
[ Sources: EU Commission | IMF ]        07.10am, 27 Aug 2018
SHARE THIS ARTICLE ONLINE
READERS' COMMENTS
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
To be honest there are no cute puppies, abandoned children
or even a snow leopard on the Facts4EU team...
...Nevertheless we rely on you to carry on
   Please support us today if you can - thank you!   
ANY CREDIT CARD USER
One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £5
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
PAYPAL USERS ONLY:
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
WE'RE REALLY GRATEFUL TO OUR SUPPORTERS BELOW IN THE LAST SIX MONTHS.
UNFORTUNATELY THIS REPRESENTS A QUARTER OF WHAT WE NEED TO SURVIVE. CAN YOU HELP?
(Anonymity respected completely if you prefer to remain private)
       Best regards, the Facts4EU.Org Team
 INTERVIEW WITH
A REMAIN VOTER
© Nicholas Berry
“WHY DID YOU VOTE REMAIN?”
“AND WHAT DO YOU THINK NOW?”
In an exclusive interview, Brexit Facts4EU.Org brings you a unique insight into the motivations of one man who voted to Remain in the EU Referendum in 2016...
...And who would now vote to Leave.
What is equally interesting is why he has now changed his mind based on the facts he has discovered since then, and why he would now vote to leave the EU.
He is just one man that’s true, but his opinions back in 2016 persuaded his wife, son and mother to vote Remain too. That’s 4 votes. For the avoidance of doubt, he has no connection with Brexit Facts4EU.Org and we approached him because our Twitter editor saw that he had changed his mind.
It transpired in the interview that him finding the Brexit Facts4EU.Org site played a significant role in his conversion, but that’s just a happy circumstance for us!
INTERVIEW WITH NICHOLAS BERRY, REMAIN VOTER FROM EAST SUSSEX
The Managing Director of Early Oak Reproductions Ltd
talks to the Editor of Brexit Facts4EU.Org
Q: In June 2016, you voted Remain, what were your reasons for that?
A: I have to be honest, I - probably like a lot of other people - didn’t take much notice of the European Union. I was more concerned with our own politics: general election time and in between.
Obviously when the referendum was announced it was clearly a major, major decision for the country to take. So I thought it probably would be a good idea to gen up on what’s behind it all.
I was between staying in the European Union and leaving. My wife was definitely anti-EU and has been for donkeys’ years. But in the lead up to the referendum we had the two Treasury reports which I suppose swung it really. I was rather selfishly thinking about my work and our pensions, and those Treasury reports really painted a bleak picture.
So that, linked with a bit more insight into how the EU worked which I got from the EU and the media… I thought, well, I’m going to vote Remain. I actually persuaded my wife – much to her horror - to do the same. And our son, and my mother. Then we had the vote.
Q: So the government’s Treasury reports had an impact on you?
Yes. They scared me. It was the economics basically that was the driving factor behind my decision.
As I say I was selfishly thinking of the future for us. But at the same time, I had a view on the country as a whole. However I had seen other forecasts from international organisations which painted a similar picture and so yes, I voted Remain.
Q: How did you feel immediately after the vote?
The vote didn’t go the way I wanted at the time, and it was quite devastating the day after. But I quickly accepted the fact that the vote didn’t go my way and there we have it. And then days turned into weeks turned into months.
If you go back the two years since then, I’ve actually learnt a hell of a lot more, thanks in large part to you guys at Brexit Facts4EU, actually, and Robert Kimbell and several others. So I’ve gained a huge amount more information. Couple that with how the UK has been doing since the vote and how far removed that is from what we were told in those Treasury reports, and this makes me now very suspicious of forecasts.
So having now got all that information, my opinion is that my decision was the one that a) didn’t get the vote and b) it’s nowhere near as bad as it was meant to be, so far. In fact, it’s a lot better than it was made out to be.
And I think the way the UK is doing, despite the utmost, probably unprecedented, period of uncertainty is great. It’s quite remarkable that we’ve had uninterrupted growth since the Referendum.
Investment continues going into the UK. It’s quite astonishing the confidence that a) so many UK companies have got, and b) that foreign entities have also got in the UK, knowing full well that the outcome is going to be almost certainly a Brexit of some sort.
The worst case scenario factored in is there’ll be a ‘no deal’ Brexit, yet they still invest, and they’re still building factories, and they’re still expanding factories, there’s people being employed, there’s apprenticeships that have been created. It all goes to give you confidence that actually if they’re fine with it, I’m fine with it. For much of that particular information I have to thank the sterling efforts of Jefferson Group, Zenoot, BQ Live, Made-in-GB, Made In Britain etc.
Q: And has Brexit had any impact on your business?
A: Well, last year wasn’t great but January this year was our second-best month ever. More recently, last month we were 20% over target and this month we’re 60% up already. I accept that there’s this uncertainty but once you have certainty back, confidence will be restored.
We are where we are and we should accept it. The decision’s been made. The biggest thing is we’ve had 45 years of EU membership, we’ve had 25 years of Single Market membership. On your site you’ve shown how growth has actually been lower in the 25 years when we’ve been in the Single Market than it was in the 25 years before. I’ve checked the figures myself, using historic data from ONS, so that gives me reassurance that you get your facts right.
And then there’s growth leading up to our accession into the EEC (as it was then). For the 9 years before, it was uninterrupted growth, although we were considered a basket case economy! And yet we had three quite severe recessions during the same period of time following our joining the EEC. So history doesn’t really bode favourably on our membership.
And as you’ve rightly pointed out in one of your reports, only 1% of British people make use of free movement for living abroad, and half of 1% of students make use of the Erasmus programme for studying abroad.
It’s not to say there haven’t been benefits, but the benefits are way overplayed by the EU and their propaganda system. And things like clean beaches? Do we actually need the EU to clean up our beaches? We’re more than capable of doing that ourselves, making the right decisions to actually implement statutes to do it.
So yes, if there was another vote – which I hope there isn’t - then I would certainly vote Leave.
Q: What are your principal reasons for backing Leave now?
A: All the signs are that it’s nowhere near the doom and gloom that we were led to believe by some quarters. And when you read into these things a bit more carefully, the opportunities are there to actually make the country better.
A good example is Australia. Per capita they trade more successfully with the EU than we do. And they’re 9,000 miles away, they’re not in the Single Market, not in the Customs Union, they’re not under the jurisdiction of the ECJ, and they haven’t even got a free trade deal. So if they can do it, we can do it.
Q: How do you feel about Theresa May’s Chequers Plan? She is saying this is Brexit. Do you agree?
A: No, not by any stretch of the imagination, because it ties 100% of the UK into a number of areas of the Single Market, which goes right against the whole ethos of why people voted for independence and sovereignty. But also it prevents us doing any meaningful free trade deals with other countries, particularly where we’ve got to administer tariffs on behalf of the EU despite the idea that overseas companies can claim them back. It still doesn’t fly very well and companies don’t want that complication.
The Chequers Plan is an abject disaster.
Q: What do you think overall of the Brexit debate?
A: Hmm… If you’re active on social media, it’s very difficult to stay neutral or even centrist because if you’re arguing a point and somebody is extreme the other way, it’s difficult to be moderate. You have to go extreme the opposite way. It’s a psychological thing. It causes a backfire effect as well because people become so entrenched, even if everything points to the fact that they’re actually incorrect, they double down and won’t admit it.
My favourite one is when they move to another argument without acknowledging the first because they can’t argue against the point you were originally making.
Q: What are your reflections on how the Remainers and the Brexiteers behave?
A: Well these days I do occasionally go ‘into the vipers’ nest’ and I do engage. I would say there’s more animosity from the Remain side, although you have to be careful saying that, because maybe there are some extreme Leavers too.
The Remainers tend to get into a mess because they’re largely not that well-informed. Generally you don’t get arguments of substance because they basically can’t back it up. It’s pretty much based on forecasts or sweeping statements. “We’re going to have our economy ruined”, “We’re going to have companies closing down”, “We won’t be able to fly our aeroplanes”, “Truck drivers won’t be able to drive across from Dover”, “Insulin is going to run out”, etc, but they’re all forecasts.
And you ask “Where is the evidence for that?” and they can’t provide any because evidence of the future is simply not possible.
Q: The next set of Project Fear has just started and it will have an effect on people – what do you think?
A: Yes, a lot of people will take notice of that.
Q: It had an effect on you the first time around, didn’t it?
A: Yes, but I hope that I learn lessons very quickly. I wouldn’t have survived in business if I didn’t. Because we all make mistakes, we all make errors of judgement. The trick is to actually learn from them.
Q: Any final thoughts?
A: Brexit should be given the chance to prove itself.
OBSERVATIONS
Firstly we would like Nicholas Berry for putting his head over the parapet like this. We admire and respect people who can say that they made a mistake and have revised their opinions based on new evidence.
THE GOVERNMENT’S LIES
One aspect we found interesting was Nick’s comments about how the Treasury’s two reports before the Referendum were the main factors in influencing his vote – and thereby the votes of three other members of his family.
Only this last week we mentioned these again, and showed how the current Chancellor Philip Hammond was forced to admit these were wrong when giving evidence to the Select Committee four months after the Referendum. You can read our report here.
These were the reports saying that families would be £4,300 per year worse off, and that an immediate recession would follow any Leave vote, with 500,000 - 820,000 people losing their jobs as an immediate result.
The fact that these were official Treasury reports clearly influenced Nick, and we find it shameful that no-one at the Treasury has been fired for producing such nonsense. Even more regrettably, Philip Hammond is now trotting out similar tosh from what we now refer to as the Treachery.
WHAT ELSE CAN WE LEARN?
We found it interesting that Nick seems to have made his own efforts to discover the truth. He was kind enough to say that reading our site has made a big difference, and he also credits some groups who produce summaries of positive business news on a regular basis.
In doing his own research Nick is perhaps not typical. What concerns us are the millions of people who are still not hearing the truth, because they rely on the BBC or Sky for their news.
We are also concerned that the facts we produce are not being used by any of the large Brexit organisations, which would make them more widely available to the public. We do what we can to promote our work to the media, but if other Brexit groups used our stuff it would help. And before you ask us, please ask those organisations why they don’t use our research and reports.
FINALLY
Nick did NOT ask us to put a link to his company, but we took a look at what they do and we rather like it! We thought that some of you might be interested, so we asked him if we could add a link and here it is.
They say they are “Britain's Most Recommended Reproduction Oak Furniture Specialists” and certainly it all looks great to us. If you’re in the market for what they do and want to buy from a traditional British family-run business, then why not buy from a Brexiteer?
And no - to repeat for any Remoaners out there - we don’t know or have any connection with Nick or his company, we contacted him out of the blue, and he gave his time voluntarily for which we thank him again.
[ Sources: Brexit Facts4EU.Org exclusive interview ]        06.55am, 26 Aug 2018
SHARE THIS ARTICLE ONLINE
READERS' COMMENTS
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
Name: Brexmix, St Albans, Herts, UK      Date/Time: 26 Aug 2018, 3.04pm
Message: Hi Nicholas, I was impressed with you standing up and talking frankly about your change of mind and your reasons. This kind of mentality is what the country needs right now for all of us sake's. I hope there are many of you out there! :) I loved your final thought; "Brexit should be given a chance to prove itself!"
Name: Greg, Devon, UK      Date/Time: 26 Aug 2018, 2.50pm
Message: To Nicholas: I'm so pleased that you did this interview, I really respect you for it. I was very interested to read about your reasons for voting remain. think it's disgraceful from the Treasury to keep producing reports which then turn out to be completely wrong and they never correct or admit that they were wrong. Facts4eu produced a couple of great articles about these reports versus reality.
Name: Sally M, Norwich, UK      Date/Time: 26 Aug 2018, 1.13pm
Message: I want to congratulate Nicholas and to thank him (and Facts4EU.Org) for giving us his story and his views. Remoaners go on about a slogan on the side of a bus, but Leave had to cope with a continuous deluge of official information from government. Nicholas proves the effect of that. I admire Nicholas for standing up and saying he was misled and has now informed himself and has changed to supporting Brexit. Well done Nick!
 THE EU TRADES WITH ITSELF
© DIT
THE ‘LITTLE EUROPEANS’ COMPARED TO THE ‘GLOBAL BRITISH’
Only 2 EU countries export more to the rest of the world than within the EU itself: tiny Cyprus, and the United Kingdom.
BREXIT FACTS4EU.ORG SUMMARY
RELIANCE ON EU INTERNAL MARKET
26 of the EU27 countries rely on each other for the majority of their exports.
  • 4 countries export more than 80% of their total exports to other EU countries
For example, 83.7% of Czech Republic’s exports are sold within the EU
  • 8 countries export 70-80% of their total exports to other EU countries
For example, 75.1% of the Netherlands’ exports are sold within the EU
  • 5 countries export 60-70% of their total exports to other EU countries
For example, 66.3% of Spain’s exports are sold within the EU
  • 9 countries export 50-60% of their total exports to other EU countries
For example, 58.8% of France’s exports are sold within the EU
  • Only 2 countries export more than 50% of their total exports to the rest of the world
These are the UK and tiny Cyprus
And for many years the UK’s sales to the EU have been falling as a percentage of its global sales.
OBSERVATIONS
It is clear from the above that the interests of the EU27 countries are not aligned with those of the UK. For the EU27 as an entity, the Single Market and Customs Union are much more important to them than they are to the UK.
This might sound like an obvious observation to make. However this overall point – that the UK is a member of an organisation which has different interests – is rarely made. Or if it is made, it isn’t backed with facts.
For decades the UK has been shackled to a political organisation whose objectives it generally doesn’t share, and whose interests do not coincide with the UK’s interests.
Readers might then ask why the UK joined in the first place?
One answer of course is that we didn’t join the EU. We joined the Common Market or ‘European Economic Community’. At that time it had just 6 members: Germany, France and Italy, plus the 3 Benelux countries.
As to the question of why the UK has not benefitted from the Single Market and Customs Union in the way other EU countries have, that’s a big question with many answers, which we have covered across hundreds of articles in the last 3 years.
The key takeaway from this article is simply:
All but 1 of the EU27 rely on the EU’s internal market for the majority of their exports
The UK doesn’t, and the EU’s share of UK exports has been steadily falling for years
Brexit Facts4EU.Org, 2018
[ Sources: EU Parliament | EU Commission ]        07.10am, 25 Aug 2018
SHARE THIS ARTICLE ONLINE
READERS' COMMENTS
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
 THE EU ISN'T INVOLVED
IN 116 TRADE DEALS
© EU Parliament
HOW THE EU FLATTERS ITSELF ON ALMOST EVERYTHING
This week the EU has produced some more of its self-promoting information, this time about trade. Above is its principal claim, made on Tuesday 21 August.
This comes from the EU Parliament, and the data it uses comes from the EU Commission. The figure that readers are supposed to remember is 116.
However on reading the claim carefully, readers will note the precise wording: “in place or in the process of being updated or negotiated”.
Only when readers delve into the figures do they find the actual number of trade deals claimed to be in place.
Only 36 EU trade deals are in place, according to the EU Commission
And even this overstates the case considerably
3 years ago the EU Commission was only claiming to have 6 actual Free Trade Agreements (FTAs). It listed other, looser, small and limited deals separately. As the debate on EU membership in the UK hotted up, however, it started changing its definitions to make the total sound much bigger.
HERE IS HOW THE EU NOW DEFINES ‘TRADE AGREEMENTS’
TYPES OF EU TRADE AGREEMENT
There are three main types of agreements:
1. Customs Unions
  • Eliminate customs duties in bilateral trade
  • Establish a joint customs tariff for foreign importers
2. Association Agreements, Stabilisation Agreements, (Deep and Comprehensive) Free Trade Agreements and Economic Partnership Agreements
  • Remove or reduce customs tariffs in bilateral trade
3. Partnership and Cooperation Agreements
  • Provide a general framework for bilateral economic relations
  • Leave customs tariffs as they are
Source: Wording taken directly from the EU Commission, Aug 2018
WHEN AN EU TRADE AGREEMENT IS REALLY: “LET’S BE NICE TO EACH OTHER”
As readers can see, the third category – ‘Partnership and Cooperation Agreements’ – doesn’t represent any form of free trade agreement that anyone would recognise. Tariffs remain in place. A nice political statement is signed by both sides and each side can say progress has been made.
Despite this, the EU lists these as ‘trade deals’.
OBSERVATIONS
So the EU doesn't have 116 trade deals. In fact it doesn't even have "36 trade deals in place", because it is including a category of agreement which doesn't affect trade tariffs.
The real meat is in the second category in the EU’s list of ‘trade deals’: “Association Agreements, Stabilisation Agreements, (Deep and Comprehensive) Free Trade Agreements and Economic Partnership Agreements”.
In the next article Brexit Facts4EU.Org will show how the ‘real’ number of trade deals which are in place is well below the 36 it claims - and much, much lower than the impression given by its statement on Tuesday about 116 deals.
We will also look at just who these supposed trade deals are with. (Clue: you’ll struggle to find some of them on a map.)
Due to lack of resources this final article will not appear until tomorrow (Sunday). You don't want to miss it!
BREXIT ISN’T ONLY ABOUT TRADE
Recently we’ve produced a lot of articles giving summary information about quantifiable aspects of the UK’s membership of the EU.
From time to time we should emphasise that for most voters Brexit isn’t about the numbers, it’s about the principle of being a self-governing, sovereign nation again.
Like many readers, the Brexit Facts4EU.Org team would still have voted to leave the EU even if the economic arguments didn’t also back it up. That said, isn’t it nice to have the basic facts and figures which knock all the Remoaners’ nonsense on the head?
Please do support us with a donation today if you can.
[ Sources: EU Parliament | EU Commission ]        07.10am, 25 Aug 2018
SHARE THIS ARTICLE ONLINE
READERS' COMMENTS
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.

CAN YOU HELP US? - WE RELY 100% ON INDIVIDUAL DONATIONS
ANY CREDIT CARD USER
One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £5
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
PAYPAL USERS ONLY:
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
 “BREXIT BATTLE PACK AND TOOLBOX”
PREVIEW COPY STILL AVAILABLE TODAY
Don’t get angry, do something!
Over the past two weeks we've been working in the background on our 'Brexit Battle Pack and Toolbox'.
Full previews are available to supporters who would like to fight back against the Establishment’s attempts to dilute and thwart Brexit.
The Brexit Battle Pack and Toolbox contains the real meat of practical information and is designed to be used. You can read commentary about Brexit everywhere. This Pack is about taking action.
Supporters who have already made a donation to support our work can email us and request a link.
If you read us but haven’t yet got around to making a donation, don’t worry! You can still donate using the links below and you will receive the special advance copy of the pack.
All we ask is a donation of £5 or more to support our work, and you will then get a wealth of information to help ensure a true, clean Brexit. You will also have the chance to help us refine it before we launch it fully to the general public.
We have already received many comments and a lot of these will be incorporated shortly. We would like to give one last opportunity to people to make their contribution. Then we'll make all the edits and additions at one go, and will also make it even punchier than it already is!
If you’re frustrated, the Brexit Battle Pack is the perfect antidote!
       2.30pm, 24 Aug 2018
SHARE THIS ARTICLE ONLINE
READERS' COMMENTS
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
We've received a very large number of emails, supporting the Battle Pack, and making suggestions. These are being incorporated and we will shortly be releasing the Pack to the public. We've published some of the great comments on previous articles about the Pack, but we welcome more.
Best wishes, the Brexit Facts4EU.Org team, August 2018
 QUISLING CHANCELLOR
ACTS AGAINST UK, AGAIN
(With apologies to the original Hammer House of Horror films)
HM ‘TREACHERY’ DEPT's LATEST VERSION OF PROJECT FEAR
A BREXIT FACTS4EU.ORG FACT AND OPINION PIECE
Yesterday, the Brexit Secretary Dominic Raab outlined “the steps we in government and you in business, the public sector and voluntary sector should take, in order that we can make sure the United Kingdom goes from strength to strength.”
His statement naturally had to be cautious but it was generally a positive message.
By contrast, a few hours later Chancellor Philip Hammond, apparently acting for the EU Commission, chose the same day to publish an open letter to arch-Remoaner Nicky Morgan, Chairman of the Treasury Select Committee.
Hammond's was a negative message, threatening Armageddon – again.
BREXIT FACTS4EU.ORG SUMMARY
PHILIP HAMMOND'S LETTER TO NICKY MORGAN, PUBLISHED YESTERDAY
  • “In a no deal/WTO scenario GDP would be 7.7% lower (range 5.0%-10.3%)”
  • “Chemicals, food and drink, clothing, manufacturing, cars, and retail were estimated to be the sectors most affected negatively”
  • “Borrowing would be around £80 billion a year higher under a no deal/WTO scenario by 2033-34”
  • “Any direct financial savings are outweighed by the indirect fiscal consequences of a smaller economy”
  • “Conclusions shared by many other credible external organisations including the IMF, the OECD, the LSE and NIESR”
GUESSING THE FUTURE IN 2033
All of the above was reiterating a Treasury forecast from January this year and this forecast refers to predicted outcomes in 2033 - 15 years’ AFTER a possible WTO exit.
The message coming across to the public yesterday failed to stress the fact that the Chancellor’s claims amount to guesswork by the Treasury, as they relate to a period 15 years from now. Here’s an example of a headline, from yesterday’s Guardian:-
© The Guardian
WHAT DID THEY FORECAST, A MONTH BEFORE THE REFERENDUM?
Only a month before the Referendum HM Treasury issued its now infamous 'Apocalypse Now' forecast of what would happen immediately following a Leave vote. Not what would happen after the UK had left, but what would start happening IMMEDIATELY.
“The central conclusion of the analysis is that the effect of this profound shock would be to push the UK into recession and lead to a sharp rise in unemployment.”
The opposite happened, as everyone now knows.
Below is a Brexit Facts4EU.Org chart, showing HM Treasury’s threat compared to the reality of actual job numbers. As ever we have drawn the actual job numbers from official government statistics from the ONS, released last week.
© Facts4EU.Org 2018
As readers can see, not only did the Treasury’s claims prove to be false, the numbers of new jobs has risen dramatically, rather than falling alarmingly.
HAMMOND WAS FORCED TO RESCIND TREASURY’S FORECASTS COMPLETELY
On 19 October 2016 in evidence to the Treasury Select Committee, Philip Hammond finally admitted the Treasury’s Project Fear forecasts before the Referendum were wrong.
HAMMOND ADMITTING TREASURY FORECASTS
WERE COMPLETELY WRONG, OCT 2016
He said they assumed there would be no policy response to a Leave vote
“and yet the Bank of England has made such policy responses”
“They did not take into account some of the mitigations that we would expect to be delivered”
“They did not assume we would enter into any new Free Trade Agreements”
“The model doesn’t capture all of the potential outcomes”
“Some of those assumptions have already proved to be invalid”
“The Government’s position is that we will not be seeking to pursue any of these modelled outcomes”
This evidence was given to the same Treasury Select Committee that Hammond wrote to yesterday. His dire forecasts yesterday are in the same range that he himself was forced to discredit completely in October 2016.
PHILIP HAMMOND’S LETTER TO NICKY MORGAN, 23 AUG 2018
Readers may want to see Mr Hammond’s letter to Mrs Morgan yesterday, so here it is in full. This letter was immediately published on the government's website and got much national news coverage yesterday and today.
And in response to a reader's request, here is Mrs Morgan's original letter to Mr Hammond 5 weeks ago.
AND HERE IS OUR ALTERNATIVE VERSION
Below is our version of what Hammond may have wanted to write:
As we are both raving Remoaners I know I may write frankly to you.
I’m doing this today and publishing the letter on the government website because we still need to scare the pants off people about exiting the EU.
Now Nicky, you and I both know the Treasury can’t even forecast what shape the economy will be in next Thursday, let alone next year or the year after. However let’s hope no-one remembers me having to appear before your Committee a few months after the Referendum, squirming and recanting on the apocalyptic forecasts the Treasury had made just before the plebs voted.
Anyway, this time we’ve learnt our lesson. Instead of forecasting the immediate effect of leaving on WTO terms next year, we’ve forecast what will happen by 2033, in 15 years’ time.
Clever, huh?! I’ll be retired by then, so what do I care if these turn out to be as absurd as our last lot of forecasts – which frankly they certainly will.
I hope our attached apocalyptic forecasts will meet your need to damage the UK’s negotiating position with the EU still further.
I’m sure it will also help in scaring more people into demanding a second Referendum.
Sorry, I mean People’s Vote.
Kisses,
Philip
OBSERVATIONS
IN FACT THIS IS SERIOUS
We have a Chancellor and the Treasury - one of the three great departments of state, which we now refer to as the Treachery - acting quite clearly against the interests of the United Kingdom. Regrettably they are also backed by the Canadian Remoaner who inexplicably still retains his position as Governor of the Bank of England.
Their actions create a perception within the EU that Brexit is far from being a certainty, that the UK can't possibly afford a WTO exit and must accept the EU's demands, and even worse they suggest to all international governments, investors, and currency traders that a WTO exit will all but kill off the UK.
Only a weak Remainer Prime Minister could possibly want Hammond to stay in his post.
Arch-Remoaner Nicky Morgan wrote to the Chancellor more than a month ago, on 20 July. Yet Philip Hammond chose yesterday to reply to her - the same day that Dominic Raab was presenting a positive version of the release of 25 government papers about a WTO Brexit.
Frankly it's no wonder that our mailbag is full of previously loyal Conservative Party members telling us that they will never vote Conservative again, without a clear-out of May and her Remainer cronies.
[ Sources: HM Treasury | Treasury Select Committee | DExEU ]        06.30am, 24 Aug 2018
SHARE THIS ARTICLE ONLINE
READERS' COMMENTS
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
Name: Huev, Midlands, UK      Date/Time: 25 Aug 2018, 07.48am
Message: Would be interesting to see Nicky Morgan's 'original' letter to Hammond. What prompted her to write and who wrote it for her?
Reply: We've just added the link to Nicky Morgan's original letter to Philip Hammond, in the article above.
Name: Patrick F, Kent, UK      Date/Time: 24 Aug 2018, 12.43pm
Message: Rt Dishonourable Nicky Morgan's reply to the Rt Clever Clogs Phil (the chill) Hammond's letter of 23d August 2018:
Dearest Phil,
By my mother's apple crumble, you've got some balls, you naughty Nostradamus! You can't even predict the winner of a one horse race!
Did you brief Laura Carlsberg from the BBC before writing to me? I've seen the sparks that fly between you two you fiscally aware lothario!
Anyway, of course I agree with everything in your letter, but Philsie you need to project a more testosterone charged Chancellor than you are at the moment. When the boot TM is given the boot you will be in the hot seat and the public will be expecting you to deliver the status quo.
Image (not facts) will be everything when you're PM. Get down the gym and beef up. We want to see Schwartzenegger, not Frank Spencer! The lies will take care of themselves.
Btw do you have the spreadsheets, or is it just the way you walk?
Love ya babes!!
Nix xxxxxxxx
Name: Chris, Devizes, Wilshire, UK      Date/Time: 24 Aug 2018, 12.33pm
Message: In some ways, this latest garbage from Hammond (which would have had May's approval) could be a good thing, because it just provides more ammunition for Boris to oust May. Any Tory MPs still undecided on whether to give May more time will now realise that her time is up. Coincidentally, JRM has just written an open letter which completely demolishes Chequers. May's position is now untenable, and I doubt that she will even last until the party conference.
Name: Steve, Yorkshire, UK      Date/Time: 24 Aug 2018, 11.32am
Message: I feel watching the current media coverage on the brexit negotiation, and no deal etc we moving the narrative to be all about money! I think this is a ploy to fool the people into accepting a chequers style deal. I think we should be highlighting the fact once we have left we will have elected accountable leaders that can be prosecuted should the need arise, which is the opposite of the EU project.
Name: Brexiteer, Braintree, Essex, UK      Date/Time: 24 Aug 2018, 11.10am
Message: Hammond has zero credibility as have the rest of the EU loving civil service. They were wrong before with their prediction of doom and they are wrong now. They have as much credence as Bank of England governor Mark Carney another doom monger. If the EU was so wonderful their economy would be booming, low unemployment and stable and successful common currency, but nothing could be further from the truth. Sluggish growth, high youth unemployment, and the Euro on the brink. The UK out will be in far better place to weather any storms outside the EU, just get on with it and leave.

CAN YOU HELP US? - WE RELY 100% ON INDIVIDUAL DONATIONS
ANY CREDIT CARD USER
One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £5
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
PAYPAL USERS ONLY:
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
 OWEN PATERSON STANDS UP FOR BREXIT & BRITISH FISHERMEN
  
“DISASTROUS CHEQUERS” WOULD BETRAY OUR FISHERMEN, SAYS FORMER ENVIRONMENT SECRETARY
[Meet the Rt Hon Owen Paterson MP today - see article below for details]
TOP BREXITEER MP SLAMS MAY'S CHEQUERS PLAN
Former Environment Secretary Owen Paterson
has slammed the Government’s Chequers plan for Brexit
as a “disaster” for the fishing industry
Mr Paterson warns “a lengthy transition phase under European rules would prove fatal” for fisherman as they will be obliged to follow EU rules, including a new discard ban coming into force in 2019.
Fishermen say these rules will ban the symptom of discarding rather than addressing the fact that discards are caused by EU quota rules where fishermen must discard fish dead whilst trying to find the species their quotas allow them to keep.
When the ban is enforced, vessels which exhaust their lowest quota for a species must stop fishing entirely to avoid discarding. This could have a ruinous effect on the British fleet whilst allowing the EU to claim the ‘surplus’ fish the British fleet would no longer be able to put to sea to catch.
JOINING FISHING FOR LEAVE EARLY TODAY, MR PATERSON SAID:
“Discards show that the fundamental approach of the CFP [the EU's Common Fisheries Policy] is beyond redemption and cannot be continued. Adopting the same failed policies in London rather than Brussels is no panacea”.
“Brexit provides a wonderful opportunity to rebuild our fishing industry and improve our marine environment after years of neglect, but the timid proposals from Chequers fail to grasp it.
“Instead, if we leave under the bold terms of a world trade deal, we can immediately repeal the Common Fisheries Policy and revert to international law, automatically retaking control over all our water and resources and negotiating with our neighbours on an equal footing from a position of strength.
“We can devise a world leading, scientifically informed, accountably controlled management system based on allowing fishermen to land and record all catches in return for capping their available fishing time at sea. Such policy would allow the economic, social and environmental potential to be fully realised.
“That way – and only that way – we can ensure sustainable fisheries and a thriving marine environment for generations to come; we can start to reverse the real damage and pain inflicted by the ruinous CFP on coastal communities.”
The former cabinet minister has branded the European Common Fisheries Policy as
“a biological, environmental, economic and social disaster, doomed to failure by its ludicrous attempt to manage a complex marine environment with arbitrary bureaucratic policies as inflexible as they are remote.”
He said:
“The decline of British fishing has come to symbolise the worst, most destructive consequences of our EU membership.”
OWEN PATERSON TAKES TO THE SEAS
Mr Paterson will be taking to the waters at Eastbourne today to join Brexit-supporting fishermen complete a day’s work at sea. He expects to witness the discarding of huge numbers of dead fish as fishermen are obliged by EU law once they surpass their daily quota of a particular fish.
UPDATE: Here's Mr Paterson already out on a fishing boat this morning:-
IN THE EASTBOURNE AREA AND WOULD LIKE TO MEET MR PATERSON OR CHEER HIM ON?
We're sure Mr Paterson would appreciate your support today, if you're in the Eastbourne area. Please contact us for details.
40% OF FISH DISCARDED, THANKS TO THE EU
Around 1 million tons of fish are discarded each year, an estimated 40 per cent of all fish caught. The lost fish are worth £1.6 billion annually, or the equivalent of two billion fish dinners. The UK’s fishing industry has declined significantly since the country joined the EU in the 1970s.
Mr Paterson added:
“Since the United Kingdom joined the EEC in 1973, the effect on the British fishing industry and once vibrant rural coastal communities has been utterly shocking.
“Forty-five years ago, more than 20,000 British fishermen were landing a million tons of fish annually in UK ports. Today, landings have more than halved to around 400,000 tons per year, and the number of fisherman is down to 12,000. Where we were once a net exporter of fish, we now run an annual trade deficit close to a quarter of a million tons.
“Scrapping quotas in favour of real-time management will restore the health of our waters, allow fishermen to catch less fish but land more to create a profitable, rejuvenating industry whilst improving the marine environment to support generations to come.
“Trials of refined effort control and other alternative management systems should be conducted immediately It is vital that we use Brexit to free ourselves completely from its grasp and implement a bespoke policy tailored to the needs of the dynamic mixed fisheries which surround our shores.”
OBSERVATIONS
Brexit Facts4EU.Org has consistently supported both Owen Paterson and the Fishing for Leave organisation.
Mr Paterson is a very experienced cabinet minister. In his various past roles as Northern Ireland Secretary and Secretary of State for the Environment he has enormous experience of dealing with the EU on a weekly basis.
It is wholly inexplicable to us why Mrs May never invited him to join her cabinet, given her complete lack of experience when it comes to the EU. Not only is Mr Paterson very experienced in a range of matters which are crucial right now, he is also one of the brightest members of the backbenches.
With Fishing for Leave, we have promoted their events and we back their campaign to see our hard-working fishermen treated fairly on Brexit. With Mrs May's current Brexit Plan they are once again being sold out and this cannot be allowed to stand.
[ Sources: The Rt Hon Owen Paterson MP | Fishing for Leave ]        06.30am, 24 Aug 2018
SHARE THIS ARTICLE ONLINE
READERS' COMMENTS
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
 WHY DOES UK PAY SO MUCH
AND GET SO LITTLE BACK?
WHO REALLY BENEFITS FROM THE EU's
MASSIVE £410 BILLION 'ESI' FUND?
HOW CAN REMAINER MPs JUSTIFY THIS TO THE BRITISH PEOPLE?
Today we complete our investigation of the EU’s massive £410 BILLION ‘ESI’ Fund. We show how the UK is the poor relation when it comes to receiving money from this fund, despite being the second biggest contributor to it.
To bring this home to British Remainer MPs – and to ordinary voters in the UK – we have taken the EU’s own data on this 'European Structural and Investment Fund', as of 21 August 2018, and have expressed the information by household.
This shows a truer representation, because the UK is one of the largest countries in the EU. When you divide the figures by population, and compensate for the different sizes of household in each country, the information below is a very graphic demonstration of how the UK has been involved in a redistribution of wealth on a massive scale, from the UK to the majority of EU countries.
BREXIT FACTS4EU.ORG SUMMARY
HIGHLIGHTS OF EU'S £410 BILLION “ESI FUND”
  • Estonians are biggest beneficiaries by household
  • Polish receive 10.7 times more than British
  • Even the rich Germans and Scandinavians benefit more than British households
  • UK is second-biggest net contributor in the EU
  • Yet the UK is the 26th country in terms of getting anything back from this fund
British households come 26th on the list
© Facts4EU.Org 2018
HOW DOES THIS RELATE TO THERESA MAY'S CHEQUERS PLAN?
All of this information relates to the EU’s current financial framework of 2014-2020 and it therefore encompasses what Theresa May is tying the UK into, if her Chequers Plan is adopted.
The UK will then continue paying into funds like these for the duration of Mrs May's 'Transition Period' and probably for longer.
THE UK IS NOT ONLY SUBSIDISING FORMER EASTERN BLOC COUNTRIES
Remarkably the UK is not only subsidising the more recent, former Eastern bloc countries such as Estonia, Poland and the Czech Republic. The richer member states also receive more per household than the UK does.
Below we show a few of these. Readers will note that France receives 61% more per household than the UK. Germany - the richest country in the EU - also manages to receive 18% more per household than the UK does. And all the Scandinavian countries do better than the UK, too.
BREXIT FACTS4EU.ORG SUMMARY
RICHER COUNTRIES BENEFIT MORE THAN UK
  • French households benefit by 60% more than British households
  • Polish : 10.7 times more than British
  • Spanish : 3.4 times more
  • Irish : 3.3 times more
  • Italians: 2.7 times more
  • Even the rich Germans and Scandinavians benefit more than British households
© Facts4EU.Org 2018
WHAT IS THE MONEY SPENT ON?
Yesterday (see below) we described the six components of this fund. Below is an example of one of the payments from the fund and the use to which it was put.
EXAMPLE - IMPROVING A ROAD IN NORTH-WEST ROMANIA
Last year the EU allocated €57 million from the ERDF part of the ESI Fund to pay for improvements to 3 sections of a Romanian road. (The DN1C, in case you’re interested.) The EU made this announcement in French, as they often do when they don't want the press to report on it.
"Travel time on the section between Baia Mare and Halmeu was to be reduced by six minutes, as was the travel time between Baia Mare and Satu Mare, which will also be cut by six minutes, while travel time between Satu Mare and Halmeu was to be reduced by three minutes."
[Source: EU Commission]
We can only speculate on what the 400,000 plus Romanians now living in the UK make of travel times in some parts of the UK, which haven't benefited from such generous EU funding. They might also feel that the quality of roads in some parts of their home country is now higher than in the UK.
OBSERVATIONS
THE TRANSFER OF WEALTH FROM THE UK ON A MASSIVE SCALE
Readers may wonder why it is that none of what we have reported in the last 3 days was made clear to the British public before they voted in the Referendum. If the public had been made aware of the extent to which UK taxpayer money has been used as wealth transference to improve so many countries in the EU, the Leave result would almost certainly have been even higher.
We can only suggest that readers ask the main Leave campaigns about this.
In the last 3 years we have strived to shine a bright, shining, Brexit light on the what EU membership really means.
Today we once again call on all MPs who are anti-Brexit to do their homework. If they really had any idea what EU membership involved, we find it hard to believe that so many would continue to act to thwart Brexit.
To readers we would only say that if you think that our work is important, please donate, and please lobby the big-name, well-funded Brexit organisations to use our material.
[ Sources: All data has been mined from official EU Commission sources ]        06.50am, 23 Aug 2018
SHARE THIS ARTICLE ONLINE
READERS' COMMENTS
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.

CAN YOU HELP US? - WE RELY 100% ON INDIVIDUAL DONATIONS
ANY CREDIT CARD USER
One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £5
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
PAYPAL USERS ONLY:
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
 EU’S DASH
TO SPLASH THE CASH
HOW PAYMENTS TO MEMBER STATES FROM
EU’s £410bn ‘ESI’ FUND ARE RISING FAST
(Sorry British Remainer MPs, but you can't control this expenditure)
EXCLUSIVE: Payments to other member states out of the EU’s £410 billion ‘ESI’ Fund have risen substantially since the UK’s Referendum decision to leave the EU.
In 2016 the UK voted to leave the EU. The EU already had budgets for all its activities. One of its funds is the £410 billion pound ESI Fund, out of which the UK gets very little benefit, receiving just 3.58% of the total, despite being the second-largest member state. (If you missed it, see our first article here.)
In the chart below we show how the EU has accelerated its initial payments for planned projects under this fund since the UK’s decision to leave.
BREXIT FACTS4EU.ORG SUMMARY – PAYMENTS GROWING FROM ESI FUND
  • EU has already paid out more in first 8 months of this year than in all of 2015
  • Payments already total £19.7bn this year, compared to £13.4bn for 2015 as a whole
  • Payments to be more than double those in the year before UK’s decision to leave
© Facts4EU.Org 2018
[Statistical note: In the chart, for 2018 we have pro-rata’d the EU’s payments up to and including yesterday, 21 August. The chart shows the payments in the year to date, projected to 12 months, in order to show a comparison with previous years.]
HOW YOUR MONEY IS BEING SPENT
It is certainly the case that the EU’s projects usually start slowly, each time there is a new ‘multi-annual financial framework’ (MFF) which lasts 7 years. The current MFF is from 2014-2020.
However our research shows that there has been no attempt by the EU to cut back on its spending in any way. In fact the initial payments under this £410 billion fund have rocketed since the Referendum. We can find no record of projects which have been cancelled or postponed as a result of the UK leaving the EU.
We should stress that these are merely initial payments, and in many cases these payments have been made ahead of projects even starting. The full cost of this profligate EU Fund is £410 BILLION POUNDS, as we have said.
EU COULD HAVE BEEN SENSIBLE, AND SCALED BACK
Brexit Facts4EU.Org has repeatedly pointed out that when the UK voted to leave, only a small proportion of the EU’s total budget for 2014-2020 had actually been decided upon.
In the case of the £410 billion ESI Fund, just £52 billion (approx 13%) had been decided in 2015
In 2016 after the Referendum vote it would have been possible for the EU to have scaled back on its ever more ambitious plans, at no cost to itself nor to the member states who would have been the beneficiaries. (No cost other than the disappointment caused by the cancellation of hoped-for projects, naturally.)
OBSERVATIONS
NO CERTAINTY OF FUTURE UK BANKROLLING OF EU
The EU has been unable to produce any legal justification whatsoever for its claim that the UK should make a 'financial settlement' at the end of the Article 50 notice period on 29 March 2019.
Studies by the (pro-EU and anti-Brexit) House of Lords Brexit Committee, and by Lawyers for Britain, have concluded that no legal obligation exists to make any payment.
And if the EU had any legal argument countering this, it would of course have produced this long ago.
Nevertheless, the current Prime Minister Theresa May has proposed that not only should the UK continue making payments until the moment of (supposed) exit, but that she will also pay an extra amount (c. £40 billion pounds), plus continuing ongoing payments for a Transition Period up to December 2020, plus unspecified payments for a variety of EU programmes.
This is just one of the many reasons why Mrs May must go with the utmost speed.
THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE
On the Referendum result, and if the EU were a publicly-quoted company, its finance director would almost certainly have made a contingency in the accounts for a dramatic drop in income. This would have been done as a precaution in the event that the UK exited without a special deal involving any ex-gratia payments.
NOTHING IS AGREED UNTIL....
It is important to stress that all aspects of Brexit negotiations which have notionally been agreed so far are on the same principle used by the EU: ‘Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed’. As such, it remains the case that the EU could theoretically become bankrupt on 29 March 2019.
With only 13% of the ESI Fund decided upon in the year before the Referendum, the EU could have adopted a prudent approach and scaled back its grandiose plans.
Instead, the EU has ploughed ahead with no thought to any mitigation of its liabilities in the event of the UK exiting on WTO terms. Such an event would require no massive payments to the EU from the UK.
These are fundamental matters and we find it surprising that they are never discussed in the mainstream media.
[ Sources: EU Commission ]        06.55am, 22 Aug 2018
SHARE THIS ARTICLE ONLINE
READERS' COMMENTS
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
Name: NOT4EU, London, UK      Date/Time: 24 Aug 2018, 10.51am
Message: It is, of course, all part of the plan as the EU's lapdog May promised that we would fulfil all obligations and no country would be worse off. A mad dash is now on to 'start' every potential 'obligation' that can be made to hold us to account for years for sums that we have no knowledge or say in. If we manage to just leave, with no obligations, they will then hold up these 'promised obligations' to the international community as an example of what wicked people we are 'defaulting' on a promise.
Name: Claire, Berkshire, UK      Date/Time: 22 Aug 2018, 5.19pm
Message: Somehow you keep coming up with original articles each day, I don't know how you do it but I'm very grateful like many of your readers I'm sure. You're right, I haven't seen it mentioned anywhere in the media that the EU has just kept spending and expecting us to pick up the tab. If they had been sensible they would have cut back as we have no obligation to pay them anything after we leave on 29th March next year!
Name: AshleyGreatBritain, South Bucks, UK      Date/Time: 24 Aug 2018, 06.54am
Message: This is very sinister, and points towards back room deals between T May and EU big wigs. Is it possible that the EU know they are safe on money, as we are already locked in and the EU are already forging large batches of hand cuffs for UK officials?
Name: Richard T, Croydon, UK      Date/Time: 22 Aug 2018, 4.33pm
Message: Dear Facts4EU, Another great article today: the "Dash to Splash the Cash". Who would want to be part of such a profligate organization?
You repeat the often-used phrase: "Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed", but is this legally the case? I worry that Mrs May will sign a legally-binding Withdrawal Agreement which pays £39bn we don't owe, binds us to the Single Market as the Irish back-stop and other things with nothing agreed in return. If you have the time, I'd love to see a legal analysis of "Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed" to be certain that this isn't just spin but really means that we won't have to pay a penny if we don't get a good trade deal, aircraft rights, UK citizens rights etc.
Many thanks for everything that you do.
Reply: Hi Richard, thanks for the kind comments. Yes it's true, unless the government has made a specific commitment that has not been made public. It's a good idea to do a piece on this. We'll do it if and when we get a chance.
 WHAT DOES THE EU’S £410bn
“ESI FUND” CONSIST OF?
Below we show how the EU is spending this vast fund, which almost no member of the British public is aware of.
© Facts4EU.Org 2018
WHAT THE EU IS SPENDING YOUR MONEY ON
There are 6 main elements to the EU's overall 'ESI' Fund. These are shown below, with the EU's description of them.
ERDF – (A catch-all, plus climate change) “The European Regional Development Fund has a strong focus on 4 key priority areas: Research and Innovation, the Digital Economy, SME competitiveness and the Low Carbon Economy. The ERDF also finances ‘Interreg’ – cross-border, transnational or interregional co-operation under the Territorial Co-operation objective.”
EAFRD – (Rural support) “The EU’s rural development policy helps the rural areas of the EU to meet the wide range of challenges and opportunities that face them in terms of economic, environmental and social development.”
ESF – (EU social fund) “The European Social Fund is Europe’s main instrument for investing in people. It helps people find employment or create businesses, supports disadvantaged groups, improves education and makes public services more efficient.”
CF – (For new members ONLY - EXCLUDES UK) “The Cohesion Fund concerns 15 Member States - Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Greece, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia. Its funding is allocated to trans-European transport networks and to projects falling under EU environmental priorities.”
EMFF – (Fishing, basically) “The EMFF is the financial instrument that will help deliver the objectives of the reformed Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) and that will support the implementation of the EU Integrated Maritime Policy (IMP). It will contribute to sustainable and competitive fisheries and aquaculture, to a consistent framework for the Integrated Maritime Policy and to a balanced and inclusive territorial development of fisheries and aquaculture areas.”
YEI – (Desperate and overdue attempt by the EU to show they care about a generation on the dole.) “The Youth Employment Initiative helps Member States respond to high level of youth unemployment by supporting tailored measures to integrate young people not in employment, education or training into the labour market.”
OBSERVATIONS
Tomorrow we plan to bring you the following:
  • How Poland receives over 5 times what the UK receives
  • How even rich EU countries receive far more than the UK
  • How Germany & France each receive over 60% more than the UK
  • How the UK taxpayer is paying for EU countries to have better lives
  • How the UK is a massive loser from its EU membership
We will also give you a couple of examples of how this money is being spent, using specific projects in EU member states.
[ Sources: EU Commission ]        06.55am, 22 Aug 2018
SHARE THIS ARTICLE ONLINE
READERS' COMMENTS
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.

CAN YOU HELP US? - WE RELY 100% ON INDIVIDUAL DONATIONS
ANY CREDIT CARD USER
One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £5
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
PAYPAL USERS ONLY:
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
 EU HAS A £410 BILLION FUND
UK WILL RECEIVE JUST 3.6%
ISN'T THIS SOMETHING THE BRITISH PUBLIC SHOULD KNOW ABOUT?
(Oh, and British Remainer MPs have
absolutely no say on how this £410 billion is spent)
Latest figures released by the EU yesterday, buried deep in its workings, show dramatic expenditures which will not appear in any British news reports or on other Brexit websites.
The Brexit Facts4EU.Org team produces thousands of factual reports showing what the EU is and what the EU does. Most of these reports contain actual figures, derived from the EU’s own data. They answer the public’s thirst for real facts.
THIS IS BIG
When it comes to an EU fund of £410 billion, we’re inclined to ask readers to sit back and think for a moment. This isn’t just another figure. It’s £410 BILLION POUNDS. In our book, that’s a lot of money. Put another way, it’s £410,000,000,000.
BREXIT FACTS4EU.ORG SUMMARY – EU's 'ESI' FUND
  • Put in UK terms, this EU fund is almost 3 times what we spend on the NHS each year
  • This £410 billion fund is only PART of taxpayer money that EU has to spend
  • UK receives just 3.6% of this enormous fund, despite being 2nd-largest member state
© Facts4EU.Org 2018
THIS WON’T BE ON THE BBC
Brexit Facts4EU.Org has been working on the latest figures for this 7-year fund, updated yesterday by the EU. The preliminary results of our analysis will shock many people.
We know from past experience that the BBC will not cover our findings. We do, however, have the possibility of getting this story into a major newspaper. And as ever we hope that other Brexit organisations will cover it.
WHAT WE WILL REPORT ON
BREXIT FACTS4EU.ORG SUMMARY – OUR SPECIAL REPORT
  • How Poland receives over 5 times what the UK receives
  • How even rich EU countries receive far more than the UK
  • How Germany & France each receive over 60% more than the UK
  • How the UK taxpayer is paying for EU countries to have better lives
  • How the UK is a massive loser from its EU membership
THE EU’S DASH TO SPEND UK CASH
We will also show how the EU is dashing to spend the UK’s cash earmarked for this £410 billion fund. We will show the huge rise in payments from this fund since the UK’s Referendum decision to leave.
We will demonstrate how the EU could have cut back, but instead has accelerated its spending, with Theresa May agreeing to keep paying the bills after Brexit even though the UK is under no legal obligation to do so.
OBSERVATIONS
What we are working on is dynamite. It will resonate with ordinary British voters. It can - and should - be used by every Brexit organisation out there, as well as being covered by the mainstream media.
We are the most prolific provider of real facts about EU membership and yet we are the poorest in terms of funding. Perhaps naively we think that punchy facts to inform the British public matter.
The majority of polls in recent months have shown a weakening of the Leave majority, despite one or two being positive. The Remainers have just received a £1 million boost in funding from a British businessman, on top of the funds they have received from a foreign billionaire in recent months.
We know that moves are being planned by Leave Means Leave, and by some of the MPs with whom we speak. Political campaigning and tours around the country are great, however we have always believed that some basic, punchy facts are needed as part of the mix.
We hate to repeat ourselves, but if you think some basic facts are important and you haven’t yet donated to keep us going, please do something for us today. Then tomorrow you will see another devastating report from us, opening people’s eyes to what the UK’s membership of the EU really involves. You will know that you helped to fund this important part of the Brexit debate.
Please check back tomorrow for our reports on the £410 billion EU fund which you are paying for.
[ Sources: EU Commission ]        06.55am, 21 Aug 2018
SHARE THIS ARTICLE ONLINE
READERS' COMMENTS
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
Name: Brexiteer, Braintree, Essex, UK      Date/Time: 21 Aug 2018, 6.26pm
Message: The EU doesn't have any money of their own, the only money they have comes from contributions from member states. The UK being the second biggest contributor we pay this money to belong to the single market and customs union. If we leave the EU on WTO terms we can save all our contributions, still trade with them, but more importantly trade with the rest of the world. Prices on most things outside the EU are cheaper, we could buy most of our food from the Commonwealth countries. Anybody in any doubt just read the article by Martin Howe QC from Lawyers for Leave, "Leaving the EU on WTO terms: pulling down the barriers to world trade" a simple well researched article explains all in language you can understand. After you read that article there can be know doubt leaving the EU would prosper us all.

CAN YOU HELP US? - WE RELY 100% ON INDIVIDUAL DONATIONS
ANY CREDIT CARD USER
One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £5
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
PAYPAL USERS ONLY:
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
WE PROVIDE FACTS
AND WITH YOU
WE MAKE A DIFFERENCE
We are a committed and determined team.
You haven't given up fighting for a clean Brexit.
Together we're up against a vast army of UK & EU propagandists.
Brexit Facts4EU.Org is an influential pro-Brexit news organisation read by MPs, MEPs, mainstream journalists, eurocrats, MPs and Senators from the EU, USA, Australia and other countries.
Do you still have the determination to get the Brexit you voted for? Or in fact more than ever before?
To the right: Articles in the national press,
all of which came from Brexit Facts4EU.Org.
 
We’re committed and tireless, but we wouldn’t be here to report and fight without our supporters.
If you’re like-minded, please join our readership. If you're already 'in-the-club' we'd like to take the opportunity to send you a big thank you for all your support.
All we have here are our honest tools - research, compelling daily content, simple charts - and our most important resource - YOU.
We badly need your help to keep going, fighting for a full, clean Brexit.

ANY CREDIT CARD USER
One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £5
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
PAYPAL USERS ONLY:
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
WE'RE REALLY GRATEFUL TO OUR SUPPORTERS.
UNFORTUNATELY WE ONLY RECEIVE A QUARTER OF WHAT WE NEED TO SURVIVE. CAN YOU HELP?
(Anonymity respected completely if you prefer to remain private)
       Best regards, the Facts4EU.Org Team, 2018
To read items from our output earlier this month, simply click here.
We have also researched and published some excellent reports before this.
Please use the news archive menu at the top of the right-hand-column of this page to access those.
 


We rely on donations from the Public and from sympathetic benefactors.
Please read our 'Help Needed' page for details.



Facts4eu.org is non party-political and not supported by any Brexit campaign.
We present facts we've researched from official government and EU sources.

Now that the Referendum has been won, we have 2 main aims:
1.  To provide bullet-pointed and factual summaries of key points, to help people to ensure Brexit is delivered in full.
2.  Crucially, to allow MPs and campaigners to give reliable and consistent facts to the public.
Please don't hesitate to contact the Editors if you can volunteer in some way, and particularly if you can support us financially.
NEUTRALITY:    Facts4eu.org focuses on information which shows that the UK is better off regaining its independence and growing globally. The entire weight of the Establishment is promoting the opposite case, so this site is just one small voice trying to redress the balance.

All material © Facts4eu.org 2018 except where owned by others.
Press and Leave campaigns please contact us for re-use of information.
>