based on UK and EU official sources

Brexit news
Facts4EU Brexit Index
Brexit Battle Pack
Fight for Brexit
Click to donate or buy commemorative items


Facts4EU testimonials
Facts4EU testimonials
| Your
| Help
| Contact
Quick Brexit facts from official sources
Read by Ministers, MPs, MEPs, peers, ambassadors, journalists, and the public
BREXIT NEWS   01-10 June 2018
If you’re a journalist please get in touch if you would like to re-use any of our material. All we ask is prior contact and full attribution with a link. Likewise if you’re from another pro-Brexit organisation.
If you’re a member of the public and you want to copy and paste something of ours into a post you’re making to another site, be our guest. Please add the link: or the link to the piece itself, if that’s more appropriate.
Best regards, the Brexit Facts4EU.Org team, June 2018
We show you the list of the EU's initial demands in full
  • For 45 years the British taxpayer has been subsidising the lives of EU citizens
  • Over these years, the areas on which the EU has decided to spend money has grown and grown
  • The EU is demanding a Brexit divorce settlement from the British taxpayer
  • The headline figure is £39 billion, but is expected to be much higher
  • Do you know what the EU demands that you pay for?
Below, Brexit Facts4EU.Org exclusively brings you the list of everything for which the EU demanded payment, and which it hoped the UK would accept. To the EU’s amazement we are sure, the UK government acquiesced.
The list below has been compiled from the EU's 'Essential Principles on Financial Settlement'. The EU's demands cover everything they could possibly think of, and they involve the UK making payments to the EU for many years to come.
Some of the items mentioned will not be spent and entered into the EU’s accounts for as much as 10 years after the UK's departure. In the case of pensions this extends to many decades.
The ‘divorce bill’ list below is very long but we have taken the decision to publish it for the record. You do not have to read it in detail – just look at the length.
It is our considered view that Theresa May has acted without the reasonably-assumed consent of the British people in her negotiations with the EU.
Following the EU Referendum, one of the first areas the EU insisted should be agreed by the UK was their 'financial settlement'. This was one of the three areas which, it demanded, had to be agreed before anything else would be discussed.
Very bizarrely, the UK government agreed to this imposition instead of insisting that the UK’s exit should be discussed in its totality. To separate out three areas – and particularly to exclude the future trading relationship - was absurd in our view, and we argued this strongly at the time.
This is one aspect that helps to explain why two years have passed with virtually no progress on the fundamentals of Brexit.
The other two areas the EU highlighted from the beginning were citizens’ rights and the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic. In practice these two areas were merely covers for the EU’s real demand: they wanted to get the principle of a huge payment from the UK agreed from the start. Money was the key driver.
Despite the EU’s list of financial demands running to 10 pages, there is not one word about the EU's legal justification for demanding a financial settlement over and above the UK's normal contributions until 30 March 2019.
As we have written many times, no such legal basis exists.
If the government had been negotiating properly, it would have insisted on this. When the legal basis was not forthcoming, the British government could then have approached any financial demands by declaring that the UK might consider an ex-gratia payment if the future trading and other relationships with the EU were acceptable.
Sadly none of this happened. And this is why you are facing an enormous bill from the EU, despite having no legal obligation to pay anything at all.
Regular readers will know that at Brexit Facts4EU.Org we try to summarise lengthy documents, knowing that people don't have time for the details. However in this case we are showing the entire annexes from the EU's financial demands document, for two reasons:-
  1. To show everyone what the UK taxpayer has been paying for in the last 45 years, and
  2. To demonstrate the magnitude of the EU's demands for a divorce bill

1. Institutions and consultative bodies

European Parliament
European Council European
European Commission
European Court of Auditors
Court of Justice of the European Union
Council of the European Union
Economic and Social Committee
Committee of the Regions
European Ombudsman
European Data Protection Supervisor
European External Action Service

2. EU Agencies

2.1. Executive Agencies

Education, Audiovisual & Culture Executive Agency
Executive Agency for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises
Consumers, Health, Agriculture and Food Executive Agency
Innovation & Networks Executive Agency
Research Executive Agency
European Research Council Executive Agency

2.2. Decentralised Agencies

European Maritime Safety Agency
European Food Safety Authority
European Medicines Agency
European Railway Agency
European GNSS Supervisory Authority
Community Plant Variety Office
European Chemicals Agency
European Fisheries Control Agency
Fusion for Energy (European Joint Undertaking for ITER and the Development of Fusion Energy)
European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction
European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Training (CEPOL)
European Institute for Gender Equality
European Police Office (EUROPOL)
European Agency for Safety and Health at Work
European Aviation Safety Agency
European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control
European Network and Information Security Agency
European Environment Agency
European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights
European Centre for the Development of Vocational training
European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority
European Agency for Cooperation of Energy Regulators
Translation Centre for the Bodies of the European Union
European Banking Authority
European Securities and Markets Authority
European Asylum Support Office
European Training Foundation
Office for the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communication
European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions
European Border and Coast Guard Agency (Frontex)
European Union Intellectual Property Office
EU-LISA (European Agency for the operational management of large-scale IT systems in the area of freedom, security and justice)
The Single Resolution Board (SRB)

3. Other entities

European Coal and Steel Community (in liquidation)
European Institute of Innovation and Technology


SESAR Joint Undertaking
Innovative Medicines Initiative 2 Joint Undertaking
Fuel Cells and Hydrogen Joint Undertaking
ECSEL Joint undertaking
Clean Sky 2 Joint Undertaking
Bio-based Industries Joint Undertaking
Galileo Joint Undertaking in liquidation


European Investment Fund


European Development Fund
Facility for Refugees in Turkey


European Union Trust Fund for Central African Republic “Bêkou EU Trust Fund”
European Union Regional Trust Fund in response to the Syrian crisis, "the Madad Fund"
Emergency Trust Fund for stability and addressing root causes of irregular migration and displaced persons in Africa
Trust Fund for Columbia (sic)


European Central Bank
European Investment Bank
European Defence Agency
European Union Institute for Security Studies
European Union Satellite Centre
European Schools
EGNOS & Galileo
Customs 2020
Fiscalis 2020
Hercule III

Pericles 2020



European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI)
European satellite navigation systems (EGNOS and Galileo)
International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER)
European Earth Observation Programme (Copernicus)
Nuclear decommissioning assistance programmes in Bulgaria and Slovakia
Nuclear decommissioning assistance programmes in Lithuania
Horizon 2020
Euratom Research and Training Programme
Competitiveness of enterprises and small and medium-sized enterprises (COSME)
Education, Training and Sport (Erasmus+)
Employment and Social Innovation (EaSI)
Action programme for customs in the European Union (Customs 2020)
Action programme for taxation in the European Union (Fiscalis 2020)
Programme to promote activities in the field of the protection of the European Union's financial interests (Hercule III)
Exchange, assistance and training programme for the protection of the euro against counterfeiting (Pericles 2020)
Anti Fraud Information System (AFIS)
Connecting Europe Facility-Energy
Connecting Europe Facility-Transport
Connecting Europe Facility-Information and Communications Technology (ICT)
European statistical programme (ESP)
Specific activities in the field of financial reporting and auditing
Interoperability Solutions for European Public Administrations, businesses & citizens
Enhancing consumers involvement in EU policy making in the field of financial services
Wifi For All
European Regional Development Fund (ERDF)
European Social Fund (ESF)
Cohesion Fund (CF)
Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) – CF contribution
Youth Employment initiative (specific top-up allocation)(YEI)
European Aid to the Most Deprived (FEAD)
European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) — Market related expenditure and direct payments
European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD)
European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF)
Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreements (SFPAs)
Environment and climate action (LIFE)
Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund
Internal Security Fund
Schengen Information System (SIS)
Visa Information System (VIS)
Comparison of fingerprints for effective application of the Dublin Convention
Rights, Equality and Citizenship
Union Civil protection Mechanism
Europe for Citizens
Food and feed
Creative Europe
Instrument for Emergency Support within the Union (IES)
Instrument for Pre-accession assistance (IPA II)
European Neighbourhood Instrument (ENI)
Development Cooperation Instrument (DCI)
Partnership instrument for cooperation with third countries (PI)
European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR)
Instrument contributing to Stability and Peace (IcSP)
Humanitarian aid (HUMA)
Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP)
Instrument for Nuclear Safety Cooperation (INSC)
Macro-financial Assistance (MFA)
Guarantee Fund for external actions (GF)
Union Civil Protection Mechanism
EU Aid Volunteers initiative (EUAV)
European Fund for Sustainable Development (EFSD)
Instrument of financial support for encouraging the economic development of the Turkish Cypriot community (TCC)
EU Cooperation with Greenland
Even if you don't have time to read the annexes above - or fear you may lose the will to live if you do - just look at the length. You may wish to take stock of the extent to which the EU has spread its interests far beyond any concepts of mutually-beneficial trade, or even of cooperation on areas of common interest between member states.
We have previously run articles detailing various of the items in the lists above, showing how money is being spent by the EU unbeknownst to the British taxpayer.
To many readers, some of the items will be somewhat surprising. For example, why does the EU have a "Trust Fund for Columbia"? And yes, we know that the correct spelling is 'Colombia', otherwise they're talking about a film studio, but it seems that the EU doesn’t.
And why is the UK expected to pay for "the protection of the euro against counterfeiting"? Do they help to pay for the pound's protection? We could go on.
We happen to think that this whole subject is quite important to Brexit and to the people of the United Kingdom. Theresa May has agreed in principle to pay the EU £39 billion. That’s a lot of doctors, medicines, police, elderly care, repaired roads, school teachers, etc.
This Prime Minister’s performance over Brexit has been pitiful. In the past two years when we criticised what the government was doing, we were taken to task by readers who support the Conservative Party. No longer. Now all we receive from Conservative voters are emails telling us they will not vote Conservative while she remains Prime Minister.
Unless the Conservative Party listens and acts, it looks to us that it will suffer serious consequences. Feelings are now running very deep indeed and these consequences could prove to be felt for very many years to come.
[ Sources: EU Commission ]        06.10am, Sunday 10 June 2018
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: Peter D Gardner, Australia      Date/Time: 16 June 2018, 07.16am
Message: Re. Abrogation of Lisbon Treaty - NickC of Yorkshire, wrote: "Under the Vienna Convention, when we abrogate a treaty, we must fulfil those obligations we undertook when the treaty was in force."
I do not believe he is correct. Martin Howe, QC of Lawyers for Britain has published a paper saying this is not true. Article 50 is quite clear that any state may leave without further obligations with a maximum notice period of 2 years. All the EU's commitments are made in that knowledge. The Vienna conventions says the correct process of leaving a treaty is first of all to abide by what is in the treaty. If the Treaty says nothing there are further options. SO those further options are not relevant. In any case I suspect he is getting confused with acquired rights, an entirely different question.
Name: Not4EU, London      Date/Time: 10 June 2018, 6.51pm
Message: Well I've waited & waited, but see no signs from the remainstream media nor from May's 'Brexit' team on P Trump's ace manoeuvring & grenade lobbed into the EU & assistance to our country's negotiations.
With all the talks on tariffs, the EU reps (so 6 of them including the 'observers') were all set to talk of 'free & fair trade' & attack P Trump for his 'nasty' tariffs. He responded that he really wants free trade & no tariffs throughout the G7, leaving the EU cabal struggling to explain just why they are insisting on keeping tariffs. Not only this, but he was giving May a chance to stand up for her country. After all, haven't we been hearing about the free trade, no tariffs deal that she 'wants' from the EU since her Lancaster House speech? Wasn't that her raison d'être for paying £40 bn + in the 'hope' that it might be considered?
Here she was, being given a helping hand in the negotiations with the support of the US. The trade deal that we want & no unnecessary money being paid. A lovely hole beneath the waterline in EU protectionism & she...did nothing but side with the EU. It confirmed to P Trump that she is a waste of space, evidenced by her being omitted from any comments.
A 'real' leaver would have jumped at the opportunity to achieve exactly what they'd asked for, supporting P Trump & the EU would have no real argument. Daily May & her corrupt Government, the opposition & a large swathe of Parliament show the contempt that they have for democracy & the people of this country. They have been bought & paid for by the EU/Globalist swamp. The draining cannot come soon enough.
Name: NickC, Yorkshire, UK      Date/Time: 10 June 2018, 4.30pm
Message: Under the Vienna Convention, when we abrogate a treaty, we must fulfil those obligations we undertook when the treaty was in force. So we must, unfortunately, let the EU have some of our cash that we agreed to pay in 2014 during the last MFF round. That MFF terminates at the end of 2021.
Bear with me. The UK will pay the normal fee up to April 2019. The time left afterwards, to the end of the MFF, is 21 months. Our "normal" annual fee is about £20bn gross, of which £10bn to £12bn is free money to the EU. Therefore the EU cannot justly be given an amount exceeding about 21/12 x £12bn = £21bn. Otherwise we will be giving the EU MORE than Vienna obliges us to do.
Actually, the amount the EU owes us must be subtracted from the £21bn figure. That is difficult to know but must be many £billions, meaning we probably owe the EU next to nothing. So most of the £39bn is a BRIBE. That is illegal in the UK
Name: Patrick H, London      Date/Time: 10 June 2018, 1.20pm
Message: This is very interesting and thanks again Facts4EU for eruditely researching the facts and demonstrably indicating where our contributions go, in detail! (Of course along with the other few providers that no doubt are vastly more net beneficiaries than the UK, i.e. Germany/France). [Ed.: France pays far less in net contributions than the UK does.] May I suggest you take a look at the document that outlines the EU's administrative staff costs, their salaries and the enormous benefits they get for being loyal Brussels acolytes? The last time I looked, 2 years ago, there were circa 33,000 staff in and around Brussels in various guises. The total remuneration for this staff is colossal - many £Billions. Question: with this entire administrative staff under Brussels control, what is the point of Wasteminster and all those self-serving indulgent troughers? Again, informative as your list is, my biggest concern is the manner in which T. May is so obviously switching her allegiance to Brussels and snubbing and alienating our most important customer, USA, that will also be a major strategic partner post-Brexit. David Davis, which has been pointed out previously, appears tired, despondent and resigned to some underhanded agreed outcome that is clearly not going to be a clean Brexit? My circle of friends and I believe there is now a real threat within Government (regardless of the most outspoken Parliament Brexiteers and their anti-EU rhetoric) to circumvent a satisfactory Brexit...who believe, once the electorate has given up, will return to their pampered, benefit-laden lifestyles inside the non-accountable Wasteminster bubble! The real issue is not Brussels it is Wasteminster, with its anti-British democracy stance. Therefore, the first act is to remove the greedy troughers, then tackle Brussels head on! Question: Is there a person out there willing to make their move and take this debacle by the scruff of the neck and deliver a real Brexit?
Name: Paul Hughes, UK      Date/Time: 10 June 2018, 11.12am
Message: "To many readers, some of the items will be somewhat surprising. For example, why does the EU have a "Trust Fund for Columbia"? And yes, we know that the correct spelling is 'Colombia', otherwise they're talking about a film studio, but it seems that the EU doesn't."
Sometimes one needs to look further afield to the District of Columbia in USA - Historically, as a sphere of political control and influence. If, one simply Googles: Columbia, Jesuits, Pope, EU and joins the dots we see political influence and divergence which has a bearing on UK Politics today i.e the crushing of the nation state and the expression of democracy to be replaced by a Supranational Authority and Political Suppression. This will give the Brexiteers' the scale of corruption and power we are up against. Loved the article but couldn't resist another route to look down given your attention to spelling conflict raised above.
Name: Patrick F, Kent, UK      Date/Time: 10 June 2018, 07.36am
Message: In the report "The Withdrawal of the UK from the UK" the authors Martin Howe QC, Chairman of Lawyers for Britain and Charlie Elphicke MP conclude that the amount we owe the EU in a divorce settlement is.....NOTHING. They say "The legal position is that the EU owes us 10 billion Euros".
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.

One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £2
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
(Anonymity respected completely if you prefer to remain private)
       Best regards, the Facts4EU.Org Team, 2018
 “I will not be swayed,
by this blame game”
Yesterday Michel Barnier, Chief Brexit Negotiator for the EU, made a statement in Brussels about the state of the Brexit negotiations.
He identified five main areas of contention, before discussing Northern Ireland and then making some general comments about the current position of Mrs May’s government. Below we identify these areas with some key excerpts from the statement.
Statement by Michel Barnier, 08 June 2018
“But there is a lot of work to be done on the three other separation issues, which are important, even very serious, for our businesses and citizens:”
“The protection of the personal data of EU citizens. We want that the data that has already been exchanged remains protected as it is today. The protection of geographical indications, on which we still do not have any UK position. This subject is important for a lot of producers, for consumers, as much in the UK as in the 27 other countries of the European Union.
“The infringement and administrative procedures concerning the UK which will be ongoing at the end of the transition, for example in the area of state aid. This is not a bureaucratic point. This is a point which concerns the financial interests of the Union.
“Beyond these three points – on which we have worked a lot – there remain two major points of divergence:”
“The governance of the Withdrawal Agreement. I won't elaborate further on this point today because I spoke at length on this a few days ago in Lisbon.
“And obviously questions related to Ireland and Northern Ireland.”
On the question of the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic he had this to say:
“First, regulatory alignment. This is about very concrete subjects: goods, agriculture, electricity, certain parts of environmental policy.
“… On these concrete everyday topics, we need common rules to preserve the free movement of goods on the island and to preserve and encourage North-South cooperation.”
“The second points of discussions on Ireland and Northern Ireland this week concerned customs.
“Ladies and gentlemen, you have all seen the UK's customs paper, which we received yesterday. I welcomed the publication of this paper. It is good to see the UK engaging with us by proposing text.”
“1) First: Is this a workable solution to avoid a hard border?
“The UK recognises that the proposals in its paper cannot qualify as a backstop since the issue of full regulatory alignment is not addressed. I repeat that we need regulatory alignment to avoid a hard border. How do we solve this issue?
“2) Second question: Does the UK proposal respect the integrity of the Single Market and the Customs Union?
“The UK wants to continue benefiting from our free trade agreements. Does that mean that we will have to reopen, renegotiate or even re-ratify our existing agreements in order to keep the UK in our customs territory after the transition?
“The UK tells us that it wants to avoid any control. How does that fit with the requirements of our VAT system?
“3) Third question: Is this an all-weather backstop?
“The UK calls this arrangement temporary. How does that fit with the need to secure the absence of a hard border in all circumstances?
“Moreover, we had agreed with the UK on the principle that public authorities and businesses would need to adapt only once to the new situation created by Brexit – only once. Does the temporary nature of the customs arrangement mean that several adaptations will now be needed?”
“But let me recall that our backstop provides answers to each of these questions.
“It provides specific solutions to the unique situation of Northern Ireland. The UK is taking a different angle, however. It is looking for a UK-wide solution. Let me be clear: our backstop cannot be extended to the whole UK.”
“On customs, Northern Ireland would form part of our customs territory. What is feasible with a territory the size of Northern Ireland is not necessarily feasible with the whole UK.”
Finally Michel Barnier turned to the question of the future relationship between the UK and the EU.
“In all the UK papers that we have been receiving until now – which I read carefully with my team – there has been a request to maintain the status quo, a form of continuity, which is paradoxical seeing as the country decided itself to leave the European Union.
“The United Kingdom seems to want to maintain the benefits of the current relationship, while leaving the EU regulatory, supervision, and application framework.
“When we respond to UK leaders saying that these benefits are not accessible outside the EU system – because of their decision – some people in the UK try to blame us for the consequences of this.
“I simply want to say that we will not be swayed, I will not be swayed, by this blame game.”
We see nothing in what Barnier said to indicate that there is any chance of an agreement, based on Mrs May’s latest proposals. We refer to them as Mrs May’s proposals because it became quite clear this week that they had been drawn up by civil servants working with her in Downing Street, specifically her co-Remainer Olly Robbins.
David Davis seems to have been one of the last to see the document. We are now uncertain as to Mr Davis’ role. He clearly has no authority and in our view he has achieved very little thus far.
When it comes to the final part of Barnier’s statement he is stating the obvious, but sometimes the obvious needs repeating.
The key part is when he refers to Mrs May’s Transition Period, describing it as “a request to maintain the status quo, a form of continuity, which is paradoxical seeing as the country decided itself to leave the European Union.”
In essence, Theresa May wants to have something she can call Brexit when in fact it means no change other than losing all the UK’s existing rights to vote on anything.
Mrs May can paint it any way she wants, but this is what her position boils down to. She is not a woman who appears to understand that you’re either in the EU or out of it. She wishes to pacify the majority Remain faction in her government by remaining in everything, whilst persuading the Leave faction and the Leave majority in the country at large that the UK will not technically be a member of the EU.
Sorry Theresa, but the old adage that if looks like a duck etc is very apt here.
The starting point should have been that we are leaving everything. Then the negotiations could have focused on some new arrangements for aspects of cooperation with the EU that are in both sides’ interests.
Instead, May’s starting position has always been “How can I keep everything as it is, but call it Brexit?”
We have repeatedly said that the EU would never do a sensible deal with the UK and that we would leave on WTO terms. The desire to punish is too strong. To put it crudely, “stuff your deep and special partnership, Theresa, the EU elites are not our friends.”
Had you started from there you might have delivered Brexit by now.
[ Sources: EU Commission ]        07.15am, 09 June 2018
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: Jeremy, Chichester, UK      Date/Time: 09 June 2018, 10.23am
Message: [Off topic] Good article by Daily Telegraph's Jeremy Warner on how the aggressive punishments imposed on RBS because of bail out by forcing fire sales of assets have shrunk the Bank so taxpayers have lost money. Was there an ulterior motive one wonders, to damage a major UK banking company by adding to its woes under cover of EU Rules? Us rolling over again!
Name: Not4EU, London      Date/Time: 09 June 2018, 08.33am
Message: Great articles, and spot on as usual.
May's tactics regarding the 'transition' are laid bare in Barmier's comment: “Moreover, we had agreed with the UK on the principle that public authorities and businesses would need to adapt only once to the new situation created by Brexit – only once. Does the temporary nature of the customs arrangement mean that several adaptations will now be needed?"
It seems clear that the EU will claim that the single adjustment to the so-called 'transition' will be the one allowed change, to trap us in their clutches. NO. The one adaptation should be for 23.01 hrs (GMT) on 29th March 2019.
Walk away. No deal. Just LEAVE.
If you’re thinking about helping us in the fight to achieve a full, clean Brexit, you won’t be added to a mailing list, you will simply receive a heartfelt thank you. You can use your credit card or Paypal and it’s very quick.
You could make a one-off donation from £2 to £20,000, (please don't be shy!), or a regular monthly amount which really helps us to plan our resources. You can cancel a monthly payment at any time.
We’re read by MPs, MEPs, peers, ambassadors, journalists, DExEU, Brussels bureaucrats, and the public. We research, we write important factual articles, and we lobby politicians. Our work matters and it makes a difference.
Best regards, the Brexit Facts4EU.Org team, June 2018
  • 9 leaders attended the ‘G7’ Summit in Canada
  • Only 6 of them were elected by popular mandate
  • 1 is a Prime Minister appointed by a coalition government (Giuseppe Conte, Italy).
The other 2 attendees have no democratic mandate by popular vote:
  • Donald Tusk, EU Council President, and
  • Jean-Claude Juncker, EU Commission President
Our editor wrote yesterday of the mismatch in western democracies between the ruling elites and ordinary people. At the same time, the leaders of the G7 countries were meeting in Quebec, Canada.
These countries are the seven major advanced economies as reported by the International Monetary Fund and they account for 64% of net global wealth.
As we have noted for previous G7 Summits, the EU was also present in the forms of Presidents Juncker and Tusk, despite the EU not being a country.
© Facts4EU.Org 2018
The European Union is described as “a non-enumerated member”. It should be remembered that currently out of the seven countries in the G7, four are members of the EU, so it can be said that the EU is extremely well-represented overall.
As with so many things in life, it is often possible to boil down apparently complex questions into a single illustration.
In the photo and the chart above you see a classic illustration of the heart of the problem with the EU. Neither Donald Tusk nor Jean-Claude Juncker have a popular mandate. That is to say that neither were elected by the peoples of any constituency. You didn’t vote them in, and you can’t vote them out.
Donald Tusk was appointed by the leaders of the EU28 member states. Jean-Claude Juncker is in fact a civil servant, employed by the EU Commission as its President. Technically there was a vote in the EU Parliament to endorse this, but in classic former Politburo fashion his was the only name on the ballot paper.
Please just stop and think about this for a moment. If we showed you some of choicier videos of Jean-Claude Juncker in our collection, it is seriously difficult to imagine that this former Prime Minister of a tiny European country with an ongoing history of financial irregularities could ever have been voted for by the British people.
In the event, that wasn’t a problem for the EU because they didn’t give citizens a right to vote for him. This makes him an unelected civil servant, but with massive powers.
For anyone wanting to know why the EU is included in the talks and had two delegates (Tusk and Juncker), they need only look at the body deciding membership – the pro-EU IMF, based in Paris, and run by the Europhile Frenchwoman Ms Christine Lagarde.
Ordinary people sometimes tire of the intricacies of the whole EU debate, and frankly we don’t blame them. We spend half our lives on the nonsense spewing forth from Brussels and there are certainly other things we’d rather be doing.
However what we’re presenting here is about as basic as it gets. How is it remotely possible that the EU was set up in such a way that it has these two ‘Presidents’ who can strut around at a ‘G7’ Summit, and yet neither of them hold elected positions?
There are of course five other EU Presidents, none of them elected by popular mandate, all holding positions of power affecting ordinary people’s lives.
Let’s not forget that the EU never ceases to espouse on ‘democratic deficits’ and ‘the rule of law’ when it comes to countries such as Poland and Hungary. When it comes to its own arrangements and the scandalous situation in Catalonia, however, the EU goes strangely quiet.
We spend a lot of time providing fact-based articles with numbers, obtained by laborious research through EU documents and spreadsheets. We do this in an attempt to give people solid evidence about the EU and we hope we manage to make simple points and to make them digestible.
What is so often forgotten by commentators and Remoaner politicians is that a major part of the vote to leave the EU wasn't about numbers. It was about those good old British principles of democracy, accountability, and control in the hands of ordinary people.
When we first started three years ago we didn't see democracy as being under threat. Now we do. Three years of intensive study day after day has left us deeply concerned that there is an entire swathe of people who believe they know best - better than the people who just go about their lives, making a living, and caring about their families and their communities.
Perhaps the rise of the term 'populist' best sums this up. How could this ever have become a pejorative term if the basic principles of democracy were deemed sacrosanct?
Some of us on the team have direct experience of the authoritarian nightmares of the old Soviet bloc. More and more we see creeping attributes of those totalitarian regimes in the statements and the ambitions of the European Union. People across the continent are finally waking up to this, but the rot goes deep. Even when (if?) Brexit has been achieved, the influence of some of the odious thinking coming out of Brussels which has infected some of our politicians, media, civil service, and commentariat will need to be fought.
For now though, let's focus the fight on ensuring that the free will of the British people expressed in the EU Referendum almost two years ago is delivered in full.
If you're a patriot and believe in Brexit, we hope you might help us to build a war-chest today. The Remoaners' new campaign was launched yesterday and they have over £2m already. Could you possibly spare a few quid to keep us fighting?
[ Sources: Official G7 site | National election commissions ]        06.30am, 09 June 2018
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: Patrick H, London      Date/Time: 09 June 2018, 12.46pm
Message: Another insightful FACTS4EU article that gets to the very heart of the issue. When things are boiled down to their basic bones the truth always prevails, regardless of insidious deplorable shenanigans, as history has shown time and time again. These may only be words but "words are mightier than the sword"...real democracy will triumph eventually! Many Thanks
© Facts4EU.Org 2018
       Friday 08.50am, 08 June 2018
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: R Ellison, Essex, UK      Date/Time: 09 June 2018, 09.17am
Message: Who is answerable to whom in the UK, can be represented by an upturned Pyramid. Imagine, at the top, the biggest area represents the People of this Country, who are the Electorate, wealth creators and majority tax payers. Much further down, in a tiny section, are the Civil Servants, with, even further down, the minuscule Government and the teeny weeny pin prick at the bottom is.....? The Cabinet and Prime Minister! Those at the bottom end of the Pyramid must look up to the People at the top. Those at the top can look down on those below. Why? Because the People actually hold the Power: if crossed, they will vote out a discredited Political Party at the next General Election. Civil Servants and the 'Pin Prick' only survive if they respect the majority wish. Civil Servants must NEVER usurp their positions; they are there, as 'Servants' of the Country, to assist those who have been voted in. They MUST NEVER create Policy, or have an undue influence over Government. The issue uppermost, to LEAVE THE EU, is being thwarted by Theresa May and her 'oily rags'. She is not delivering a CLEAN LEAVE. Any Party must BEWARE forgetting who controls both the purse strings and who resides at 10 Downing Street. The Conservative Party are looking extremely feeble. They know a rot has set in with the PM intent on carrying out Remainer ploys, but they do nothing to stop her. By doing nothing, they stand to lose everything. Prime Ministers and Governments come and go. They HAVE to go when they are no longer carry out their promises. I fear the damage will be far greater than just that: I predict the Tory Party will be gone for ever. Dead as a Dodo! Their Memorial will be: 'They forgot all about the People and Democracy'
Name: Patrick F, Kent      Date/Time: 08 June 2018, 3.28pm
Message: There is one date that Theresa May will not be able to extend if she and the Tories last that long: 5th May 2022, the next scheduled General Election.
Name: Patrick H, London      Date/Time: 08 June 2018, 10.59am
Message: The picture sums up the feeble and utterly incompetent Schoolmistress perfectly! The British Government must be seen as a pathetic joke to the Brussels mandarins and the world at large? Whatever happened to the Bulldog spirit my father and grandfather spoke about in my youth? How sad our so-called establish have brought the British people to this nauseating predicament - shameful.
Friday 08 June 2018
It’s time to take stock.
The Brexit Facts4EU.Org team had been planning to do this in two weeks' time, on the second anniversary of the EU Referendum victory. However, as Harold Macmillan once famously characterised the unpredictability of political life, matters can get overtaken by “events, dear boy, events”.
It doesn’t matter who ‘won’ yesterday - Theresa May or David Davis - nor who said what, nor whether the EU and the Republic of Ireland like or dislike it. The latest version of the government’s policy paper on customs arrangements post-Brexit isn’t Brexit in any shape or form.
Yesterday was merely yet another ‘event’ in a long line of muddles, fudges, delays, compromises, spats, possible resignations, and noises off. Since that famous night of 23rd June 2016, the public has grown weary of the to-ings and fro-ings on Brexit.
How many times have we seen polls indicating the majority want the government to ‘just get on with it’? And yet, as the French say ‘plus ca change, plus c’est la meme chose’ – broadly, the more things change the more they stay the same. Our politicians just aren’t getting the message.
We can’t help thinking that we are slowly approaching a seismic shift in the political landscape. If nothing else, Brexit was – or should have been – a massive wake-up call to the political and chattering classes.
One of the messages was that people no longer cared if the ‘experts’ had adamantly declared Armageddon would follow a Leave vote. Many have told us they voted Leave fully expecting serious disruption in the nation’s economic life. Nevertheless they took the terrifying prophecies of Project Fear like a bad-tasting medicine, accepting it might make them gag but believing it would cure them in the end.
Importantly, people voted for something which they believed might hurt them in the short term. The old adage that people vote with their wallets (“it’s the economy, stupid”) had for once proved fallible.
This should have told our politicians something, but it’s now clear that it didn’t. As we now know, Project Fear was fiction. Nevertheless a big message was there for any politicians who wished to read it. Few have.
In Coppola’s epic Godfather series, things get serious between the five mafia ‘families’ and they head for empty apartments where they hole up during the fighting. This is warfare stripped bare, sleep is grabbed in snatches on old mattresses on floorboards.
Sections of the pro-Brexit community are now beginning to think the unthinkable. There is open talk of civil disobedience, of tax bills being torn up, of mass demonstrations.
Yesterday on social media we saw politicians urging restraint on Brexiteers who predicted such consequences. There has always been a wilder element which in the past could simply be ignored. Yesterday some politicians felt the need to reply. From such little details, portents start to appear.
Brexit is a symbol. Trump is a symbol. In Germany, France, Austria, Italy, and many smaller countries, ‘populist’ parties are now either in control or are in second place.
People are simply fed up. We have had decades where the ruling classes staved off such cravings for real change, making the right noises but knowing things would eventually die down. Not this time. Brexit marked a significant moment of the tectonic political plates starting to shift.
We are now in less certain territory. People voted in the largest expression of democratic will in British history, like a collective stamping of feet. The ground shook, and somehow we no longer seem to be on such solid ground.
One visible demonstration of the changed landscape is the appearance of a form of mass, collective insanity on the part of establishment figures, be they university professors, former ministers, or over-promoted peers.
Some of these individuals have been making statements which would normally qualify them for immediate supervision by a member of the psychiatric profession. Unfortunately, the psychiatrists come from the same establishment and so might not be of much use.
The libel laws prevent us from naming names, but we have read comments from public figures which indicate a form of psychosis has gripped them. These people aren’t just spouting reasonable opposition to Brexit, they are acting like messiahs preaching the only true word. The jihadis of the metropolis.
On the less well-known scale we have ordinary Remoaners who reassure each other daily on social media that they know best. Facts and reason seldom trouble their online countenances, ‘emoticotion’ is the order of the day. The sheer vitriol from some of these people has to be seen to be believed, and pure hatred is on display daily. Hatred of Brexiteers like you and our little team is normal.
A possible explanation you may wish to consider for this collective insanity is that the establishment is not used to losing.
We’re not talking about losing in the sense of Labour versus Conservative at a General Election. Brexit runs deeper than that. It challenges the accepted order of the liberal-leftie-luvvie conventions. (And if it’s possible to imagine it, this isn’t meant in a party political way.)
Brexit takes the elitist assumption of an idealistic, globalist love-in - of a world where the intelligent know what’s best and act accordingly - and it emphatically and gloriously rejects it.
Brexit chews up orthodoxy and the steady march towards uniformity and throws joyful individuality - with all its unpredictability - into the faces of those who thought they were making the rules.
In short, we are seeing the biggest challenge to the accepted order in our generation.
It is now clear that Theresa May believes that all this will blow over and that normal service can be resumed shortly. She has played a dithering, delaying gaming strategy which predicts that the stamina of the establishment will triumph, because the little people will eventually just get fed up and give up.
Let’s take a step back for a moment and review the progress of Brexit.
  • Day Zero: The people vote to leave the EU
  • Day 1: Prime Minister Cameron resigns, despite having promised to invoke Article 50 that day
  • 1 month post-Ref: Theresa May – another Remainer – becomes Prime Minister
  • 9 months post-Ref: May gives Article 50 notice to leave the EU
  • 15 months post-Ref: May announces Transition Period, extending membership to Dec 2020
  • 24 months post-Ref: May announces Transition Period extended to Dec 2021
Whilst the exact wording of yesterday’s document can be argued over, it has the effect of kicking the Brexit can down the road once again.
If the UK actually leaves the EU at the end of 2021 – a big if – this will mean a delay of 5 ½ years since the people voted for Brexit.
Forget all the ins and outs. Forget the BBC’s take on all of this, and their obsession with personality politics, let’s talk Brexit.
Is it remotely possible, under any reasonable inspection, that Brexit could have been expected to take as long as the Second World War? Did anyone in their right mind who voted Leave in June 2016 expect that they wouldn’t be celebrating a real Brexit until the start of 2022?
Has this been a Remainer conspiracy all along?
At this point, do you really care?
Most people just want Brexit. A real Brexit, where British citizens truly take back control of their lives and where laws are made by democratically-elected members of parliament. A United Kingdom that is an independent player on the world scene. A United Kingdom where we decide our own destiny.
Whatever the political machinations which are poured over by the chattering classes each day, it is now clear beyond all reasonable doubt that the current incumbent of No.10 must be ousted.
It is equally clear to us that if the Conservative Party fail to act immediately, several things will ultimately happen.
  • The Brexit which people voted for will never happen
  • The country will be plunged into a far worse state than it was when we were full members of the EU
  • Vast numbers of people will never vote Conservative again
  • Confidence in politicians from the left and right will never recover
  • A fundamental shift will take place, and the current bipolar party system will disappear
  • Civil disobedience will occur on an unprecedented scale
It is now incumbent on reasonable politicians to act, to prevent a mentality from developing and a set of events from happening.
None of the above will happen overnight. We’re not stupid. We have some knowledge and a historical perspective. Neither are we sensationalising the situation. But we are very concerned at the rising tensions visible outside the Westminster bubble.
Britain has often been first in the World. First with the industrial revolution. First with post-industrial unrest. First with the (Romanian) Cheeky Girls…
And now first with a rejection of the unelected EU monolith.
We are now entering dangerous territory, where people had their hopes raised on something as fundamental as the type of country they wanted to live in. If these hopes are dashed by politicians who simply don’t get it, there will be trouble ahead.
And she should not be replaced by one of the usual suspects. Far too much time has now been wasted on total nonsense. We need a leader who can direct operations clearly and straightforwardly and who can act instantly to prepare the UK for an exit from the EU on WTO terms.
This is still possible, given the right leadership. The wilder and most extreme elements of the establishment must be put in their place very firmly but courteously. Had Mrs May not been a Remainer, and had she not lacked any vestige of leadership skills, she could have knocked some of the more idiotic ones into the long grass long ago.
We suggest that the position the country now finds itself in is akin to Britain in 1939. These are fairly desperate times, thanks to the ditherings and warped agenda of Theresa May. We might have to look for a fairly radical solution.
Regrettably we don’t believe that this will happen. The job will go to one of the big Brexit beasts of cabinet. In our view this may push forward a true Brexit somewhat, but it’s not the optimal solution.
At a time like this, the country needs people with intelligence, knowledge and determination. People like Fox, Paterson, Redwood, and Rees-Mogg on the Tory side. Kate Hoey from Labour. Batten and Farage from UKIP, for their knowledge of how the EU works.
Business people like Dyson, Tice, Banks and others. From the Lords there is an abundance of pro-Brexit talent, all of which should be employed in the battle ahead. Some former politicians such as Peter Lilley need to be coaxed out of retirement.
You don’t have to like any of these people, you just need them to do the job for the country.
Remoaner civil servants heading the major departments need to be ousted and replaced by ambitious younger individuals who might be Remainers but who can recognise on which side their bread is buttered.
The House of Lords needs to be emasculated by the mass appointment of pro-Brexit peers. A simple and quick solution.
Yes, we know all of this is radical and all hell would break loose at first. That’s why most of the team favour a leader from left-field. Someone who could charm and inspire.
We have nine months to go before the UK leaves the EU, at least in name. It may not be ideal, but needs must. It is still possible to make this thing work.
We’re not MPs, wannabe candidates, MSM journalists or think-tankers, and we don’t want careers as TV pundits. We’re just ordinary people who have lived and worked in several EU countries, and we just want a normal, clean, full Brexit.
We want the United Kingdom to be a fully-independent country again. No fudges, no half-in or half-out’s, no transfers of vast national hard-earned wealth to the EU, no lingering jurisdiction by foreign courts, just a full, clean exit.
If that’s what you want too, and you haven’t already donated, please, please, please think about doing so. We need a war-chest. The battle is on. We’ll fight it and we’ll lobby our political connections tirelessly, but we need your help.
Unlike some of the big name Brexit organisations, we produce original material daily and we have no political affiliations. We speak for ourselves, but judging from the many private emails we receive each day we speak for a lot of you too. Do help us if you can. The time is now.
       Editorial, Friday 06.55am, 08 June 2018
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 Hughes, UK      Date/Time: 08 June 2018, 3.47pm
Message: The PM's charades and her 'play on words' are showing contempt for the British electorate who are more savvy than some would have us think. Soubry!
History will label her Theresa The Appeaser, the giver but no taker, pandering to our not so friendly Europhiles-in Brussels. She radiates hesitancy, weakness and feebleness in her dealings with Brussels. They, Brussels of course, love her as the - easy manipulated woman.
Delaying tactics argued by significant others - abroad and home-based ministers - cloudy the murky waters of deceit in this Government/Parliament. May says, "Brexit means Brexit" and the people rallied behind her. '˜How' she set about achieving this has been her and her parties downfall.
The '˜How' is the nub of the issue. Stop conceding and giving. Start showing resolve for UK by taking action in our interests not Brussels. We've been belittled enough by Tory ineptitude.
Vote for no confidence in May - please give a copy of this to 1922 committee, who should have acted much sooner.
These comments were taken from a email sent to my own MP who replied in a stereotype bland style not addressing the issues. My communication was in March 2018 asking a copy of the email be forwarded to the 1922 committee for a May 'No confidence' vote to to be set in motion. This was not even alluded to in my MP's response - Rt Hon Tobias Elwood. Furthermore, the Brexiteers' leaders have shown no mettle in replacing May. In my opinion, they are equally nondescript as she is. Whilst I agree with the article and the contents therein where is a new leader coming from?
Name: Liz F, Kent, UK      Date/Time: 08 June 2018, 2.57pm
Message: An excellent article, thank you. If only our politicians were as well-informed and passionate. Would anyone from Facts4EU like to take over from Mrs May? I've watched in disbelief as concession after concession has been made to the EU and we see the chances of a true Brexit being flushed down the pan into the sewers of Brussels. The whole process has become a circus, with more than its fair share of clowns but no ringmaster. I've tried to believe that Mrs May knows what she is doing and until recently have felt that a leadership challenge was the last thing we needed. No more. It seems as if she is living in a parallel universe, shockingly out of touch with how angry people are becoming. Does she really think that we cannot see what's happening? Does she really think that we'll sit back and quietly accept Brexit-in-name-only? She has no idea.
Name: Big Mach, Cheshire, UK      Date/Time: 08 June 2018, 1.48pm
Message: I am in no doubt that she should go, but the timing must be right. We have to get the Withdrawal Bill through the Commons with as few changes as possible. Not easy when you consider the number of Conservative MPs who are of a mind to thwart the will of the people.
The next hurdle is the June summit, at which the Robbins/May plan will probably be rejected, if the news coming from Brussels is to be believed. The Commons then goes into recess, at which point a leadership challenge can be launched.
If in the ensuing vote May gets more than 50% of the MPs supporting her she could well survive. However a slim majority would demonstrate that she did not command the overwhelming support of her party and, like Thatcher she would probably resign. There will then be a contest and the Parliamentary party will have to send the two finalists to be voted on by the membership. This is where the numbers could be tricky. There were 100 MPs at a CWF (Conservative Way Forward) meeting a couple of nights ago, most of whom would probably vote for a Eurosceptic. The ERG group, some of whom would be in CWF, would also vote for a Eurosceptic. The Remainers and their fellow travellers will probably want to ensure that two of their own go before the membership. They may vote tactically to achieve their objective, although I doubt now that they would succeed . Given that there are 316 Conservative MPs, at least 106 must vote for a Eurosceptic to ensure that the Eurosceptic is one of the finalists presented to the membership. If the ConservativeHome website is any guide, a Eurosceptic would be our next Prime Minister.
I am convinced that a Conservative Prime Minister taking a robust stand against Brussels would command the overwhelming support of the British people. At the October summit we could then put a take it or leave it deal on the table. In the meantime we would be preparing to leave without a deal. Businesses would soon get used to filing customs declarations. I have done it myself and you don’t need a degree in astro physics to do it.
My one concern is that if we are not part of the EU agencies, our approvals in the fields of aviation, chemicals and medicines would be invalid internationally. We would have to move fast to come up with interim proposals to satisfy international trading partners. That could be turbulent.
Name: Chris, Devizes, UK      Date/Time: 08 June 2018, 1.44pm
Message: The problem is that the Brexit supporting Tory MPs seem to be totally unwilling to challenge May. We hear lots of talk of red lines being crossed from the likes of JRM, JR, OP, BJ, PB, etc, but they still sit and do nothing. Maybe they are not willing to risk their own jobs, because changing leader will (almost) inevitably lead to a General Election. The irony is that when we eventually do have a GE, the Tories will be slaughtered, and end up in opposition for years or decades. They seem to be oblivious to the fact that betraying their voters will have consequences.
Name: Paul A, East Sussex, UK      Date/Time: 08 June 2018, 12.24pm
Message: May is not a leader... she is a manager and barely that. People are getting angry, she has to go or the fan will start hitting the s**t.
Name: Patrick H, London      Date/Time: 08 June 2018, 12.16pm
Message: DELAY, STAY, PAY, DITHERING MAY is an apt description and almost sarcastically rhymes. An excellent impassioned article that encapsulates the very heart of why we voted for Brexit. "There is open talk of civil disobedience, of tax bills being torn up, of mass demonstrations." I also believe, as do very many, this is the sad future that will unfold if Brexit is thwarted. Brexit was the final stand for the common people against the old guard, who are trying so desperately to keep the status quo, with all its tangible benefits, and their iron grip on the strings of power! Conjure up a vision of the UK's indigenous hardworking (all their lives) pensioners scraping a living on £164.35 a week, with declining post-retirement healthcare, while the Establishment, Corp. Businesses, Celebs, senior Public sector management, Champagne Conservatives/Liberals/Labourites drown in ill-gotten wealth! There are no political parties working for the common person today. They are all as one - self-serving elite Parties for the rich! Therefore, this is a once in a generation opportunity, to undo the wrongs perpetrated on common people by the ruling classes over many hundreds of years. I trust and hope the real people will not give up this epoch-changing moment in history easily!
Name: Steve, Yorkshire, UK      Date/Time: 08 June 2018, 09.52am
Message: The headline says it all - well said !

One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £2
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
COST €13.3 BILLION IN 2014-2020
Children in British schools are taught that there are 28 member states of the European Union. The majority of adults know this too, even if most would be hard-placed to name them all.
But did you know about the EU’s tropical members, parts of the colonial empires of France, Portugal and Spain?
And did you know that the British taxpayer has been funding these offshore paradises?
  • There are 9 ‘Outermost Regions’ of the EU
  • 6 are French colonies (French Guiana, Guadeloupe, Martinique, Mayotte, Réunion & Saint Martin)
  • 2 are Portuguese (the Azores & Madeira)
  • 1 is Spanish (the Canary Islands)
  • Cost to EU taxpayers 2014-2020: €13.3 billion
Nb These (mostly) tropical islands now have special legal statuses but we’ve used the term ‘colonies’, as they were part of the empires of each country.
Despite being located thousands of kilometres from the European continent, the EU’s 9 ‘Outermost Regions’ (OR’s) are an integral part of the EU, with a combined population of 4.8 million, equivalent to that of Ireland or slightly more than that of Croatia.
They are not the same as the EU Overseas Countries and Territories (OCTs). There are 25 OCTs but they are not part of the Single Market and must comply with the obligations imposed on third countries.
The OR’s are the beneficiaries of large amounts of EU taxpayer cash each year. The money comes from a variety of EU funds which we are now able to reveal below.
European Regional Development Fund, including special allocations and European Territorial Cooperation €5.0
European Social Fund (ESF), including Youth Employment Initiative €1.9
European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development €1.5
EAGF - Programme of Options Specifically Relating to Remoteness and Insularity programmes, funded from the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund €4.6
European Maritime and Fisheries Fund €0.3
Apart from the special ERDF allocations, Outermost Regions also benefit in the area of agriculture from the POSEI programmes (Programmes of Options Specifically Relating to Remoteness and Insularity), funded from the EAGF (see table above). These programmes focus on two major types of measures:
  • specific supply arrangements designed to mitigate the additional supply costs relating to essential products for human consumption, for processing or for use as agricultural inputs; and
  • measures to support local agricultural production
© EU Commission
Article 349 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union recognises the specific situation of these regions and gives them a special status. The Article provides for the adoption of specific measures within the framework of European law. A Court of Justice judgement in 2015 clarified the scope of this.
Last October, EU Commission President, Jean-Claude Juncker, talked about the Outermost Regions having special policies within the EU:
“I have always paid particular attention to the nine regions we call the outermost regions, which are first and foremost European regions, and which project Europe's presence in the world. This strategy, which provides the basis for a renewed, strengthened and privileged partnership, is a new specific example of a Europe that protects, provides the means to act and offers equal opportunities to everyone.”
- EU Commission President Juncker, 24 Oct 2017
Dear reader, you are probably someone to whom €13.3 billion (approx £11.7 billion GBP) is not a lot of money.
Same here, naturally. Sometimes cheques arrive in the Brexit Facts4EU.Org offices signed “With love, Jean-Claude” and they can go unopened for days.
However you may feel that the weary British taxpayer might have wanted to know about how some of his hard-earned is spent by EU Commissioners.
Worry not, some of these unelected Commissioners have personally visited these exotic, tropical paradises on behalf of citizens, to ensure that the money is being well-spent.
On a more serious note, we have previously reported on the way in which some EU countries seem able to receive money for all manner of things, which in the UK would automatically be assumed to be the responsibility of the member state government.
When we first started investigating the EU’s Outermost Regions, we thought we would find some British possessions on the list. After all, the British Empire was the largest in the World – three times larger than the French empire at its height, in terms of population of the colonies concerned.
Despite this, it is the French who dominate the list and the UK is absent.
From documents we have seen, it seems that the EU is finally waking up to the fact that it has territories of strategic importance located around the globe. It’s important to stress that these nine Outermost Regions are claimed as EU territory. They fall within the definitions in the Treaties.
We would suggest that this is another example of how the EU has always spent far too much time thinking about itself. It has ignored the potential of these assets for decades.
Remoaner MPs talk disparagingly of Brexiteers as being insular Little Englanders. In reality our experience is that it is the Brexiteers who are looking outward, and who are looking forward to re-establishing the United Kingdom as the proud, independent, global-trading nation it once was.
We are about to see yet another meltdown in British government policy towards Brexit. Yesterday’s performance by the Prime Minister during PMQs in the Commons was, frankly, pitiful. We will comment on the overall situation in an article in the coming days.
On Tuesday next week there will be a major debate on the Withdrawal Bill during which the massed ranks of Remoaner MPs will once again attempt to thwart the democratically-expressed will of the British people.
We strongly believe that it is necessary to continue to shine our big, bright, Brexit light on the failing and dysfunctional mess that is the European Union.
Currently these nine Outermost Regions of the EU do not benefit the UK at all, despite the hefty price tag. People might want to know about this.
In the battle about to be joined, we need as many decent British people on side as possible – whether they voted Leave or Remain in the Referendum. We need MPs to be aware of the strength of feeling. The vote must be respected and honoured in full.
To achieve this we need to continue to demonstrate to Remain voters just how they were deceived.
Information such as that contained in this article is just another blow we can strike.
The coming week is one of those critical times. If you would like us to spend more time providing information and lobbying MPs, we will do this. However none of the team have mastered the art of living on fresh air.
If you have been thinking about donating, now would be a time when your money really would make a difference.
[ Sources: EU Commission | EU Parliament | Numerous other sources ]        06.15am, 07 June 2018
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: Patrick F, Kent      Date/Time: 07 June 2018, 6.03pm
Message: In 2015 Parliament voted for the referendum, giving the choice of remaining in or leaving the EU to the UK electorate. The Prime Minister at the time, David Cameron, promised on behalf of Parliament that the result of the referendum would be honoured If the UK voted to Remain in the EU we would. If we voted to Leave the EU he said he would trigger Article 50 the next day to start the process of exiting the EU.
David Cameron did not do this. Instead he resigned.
As one of the 17.4 million people who voted Leave I believe that in the event of a clean exit from the EU parliament will have acted on the mandate given to them on June 23d 2016. If this does not happen and we remain partly or wholly within the EU because Parliament, and the individual members of the House of Commons and the peers of the House of Lords have voted to obstruct our smooth exit from the EU, then I ask the question: are there grounds for a legal case to be brought against them, for wilful obstruction of the people's mandate to exit the EU?
Regards, Patrick F
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.

One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £2
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
(Anonymity respected completely if you prefer to remain private)
       Best regards, the Facts4EU.Org Team, 2018
Below we present the speech made by the Rt Hon David Davis MP this afternoon at the headquarters of RUSI in London.
We will be commenting on this speech in due course.
[ Source: RUSI ]        4.55pm, 06 June 2018
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: R. Ellison, Essex, UK      Date/Time: 07 June 2018, 08.03am
Message: On 6th June at the Headquarters of RUSI, the Rt Hon David Davis appeared a changed man. Gone was the ebullient, cheery man, enjoying his role in the Brexit negotiations. Yesterday, David Davis stumbled over words, stuttered badly, avoided eye contact with the Media by staring dolefully down at his lectern, and responding with very clipped replies to questions. He looked decidedly uneasy. He beat a hasty retreat from the Hall. Something has gone decidedly wrong. He wore the air of dejection. Could it be in embarrassment by what he's been instructed to say? Could it be Theresa May has now morphed into a dictatorial, 'You will do as I say' approach, to get her own way? Haas she been influenced by the unsavoury characters in Brussels? The leadership style is now eerily similar. Mrs May appears to have conveniently turned her back on the British way of Democracy: healthy debate and decisions by a show of hands. Here are just a few examples: She accused Russia of the Skripal poisoning, without hard evidence, she send in the RAF to bomb parts of Syria, without hard evidence and she sprang to the defence of the EU against, the USA, our good trading ally, on duties on steel. She's even had the temerity to silence any opposition by Senior Members of her own Party on Heathrow expansion. CLEARLY NOT AVERSE TO GETTING STEELY, EXCEPT ON HER DEALINGS WITH THE EU BUREAUCRATS ON BREXIT NEGOTIATIONS! What does that say? It tells us that, unless her own Party Members REPLACE MAY FORTHWITH with a Brexiteer as PM, then it'll be chips for the Conservative Party.
Name: Ashley, South Bucks, UK      Date/Time: 06 June 2018, 5.48pm
Message: Hi, I have recently heard that Mrs may might call a general election in the autumn! if this is the case I think it would be very wise if the country could vote to get Ukip in power. you may or may not like Ukip for whatever reason, but they have never had a crack at the whip,and I believe if they got in,they would do everything possible to show the country what they can do, and to give the country another party to really believe in. I fear that Brexit is fast fast slipping away! And as you know if Ukip were in power we would finally see a hard line stance taken against the EU commission. Conservatives seem to want to dilute Brexit as much as possible, and labour would keep us in some sort of union. Ukip is the answer now for Brexit. we've had a Brexit win, then Trump, now we need Ukip. possibly when the time is right, you can do an article about this. Brexit is being betrayed from the inside! we know what we voted for and if its not delivered the country will erupt. It's clear the conservatives are building us up, then slowly breaking Brexit down in the hope that we wont even notice that much. Best regards.

One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £2
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
  • France receives the most from the EU's Common Agricultural Policy (CAP)
  • French CAP payments proposed to be €62.3 billion for 2021-2027
  • That's 17.5% of the total to the 27 countries
  • It's 43% larger than the next-largest payout, to Spain
Yesterday we reported on the EU Commission’s new €365bn budget for its ‘Common Agricultural Policy’.
We asked how reasonably-minded Remain voters would have voted if they had known that 28.5% of the entire EU budget will be spent on this area, when British farming accounts for only 0.5% of UK GDP.
We further asked whether Remain voters would think it reasonable that 40% of this enormous agricultural and rural expenditure of €365 billion euros is to be spent on ‘climate action’.
Today we bring you the unpalatable vérité that by far the largest recipient of these funds is one of the wealthiest countries in the EU:
Virtually unreported by the British media, the EU Commission has just published details of the huge expenditure area known as the ‘Common Agricultural Policy’ (CAP).
We thought you would like to know who is going to get the lion’s share of the funds.
Below is a Brexit Facts4EU.Org chart which shows the breakdown by country. The figures come from the EU Commission and are therefore uncontestable.
© Facts4EU.Org 2018
As you can see, by far the largest beneficiary of payouts is France, which will receive €62.3 billion. This is 17.5% of the total payouts to each country. The payout to France is 43% larger than to the next-largest recipient, Spain.
The top 4 beneficiaries combined – France, Spain, Germany and Italy - will receive over 50% of the total payouts under CAP, leaving the remaining 23 countries with under half of the total to share between them.
If you are one of our French or German readers, you may want to look away now.
In its earliest days, the forerunner of the EU was a product of its time. The Second World War had ended only 12 years earlier and was still fresh in people’s minds. Much of the continent – like parts of the United Kingdom - was still a building site.
Critically, German guilt was an overt factor in much of the political thinking of the time, especially from the generation of post-war German politicians. This even exists today, but at a noticeably lower level. Back in the late fifties and sixties, it was much stronger.
When it came to structuring an economic and political grouping, the interests of France – defeated early in the war – were placed front and centre of the new organisation. And as a nation for whom agriculture was a dominant part of the economy, unsurprisingly a lot of the thinking and funding of the new European grouping went into this.
It is often overlooked that around 80% of the budget was directed into agriculture. Since then the ratio has gradually fallen, but this has been done in the face of regular and fierce opposition by the French.
The agricultural lobby still plays big in France. When was the last time you can remember British farmers blockading all the roads around London? Yet this still happens regularly to Paris and other French cities, when French farmers have a grievance.
Nevertheless, the proportion of total EU funds applied to the Common Agricultural Policy has fallen, and in the EU Commission’s latest proposed budget it will stand at 28.5%. A big fightback has already started, and it will be interesting to see where this ends up.
Now 28.5% is a big drop from 80% sixty years ago, but nevertheless it’s still huge. Remember, DEFRA stated only last month that British agriculture is responsible for just 0.5% of UK GDP.
We would suggest that the figures we have given you yesterday and today are a window of light into the murky and uneasy world of the UK’s relationship with the EU.
Take a step back with us. Are the British public aware that over half of what they have given to the EU has gone to agriculture and subsidising inefficient farmers? They may be vaguely aware that some of it does, but over half of it?
Surely even the new reduced proportion of 28.5% is far too high for an EU of the 21st century?
This is so disproportionate when you look at the interests of Britain that you begin to see why this whole thing was one ghastly mis-match from the very start. It helps to explain so many things, for instance why it is that the Single Market has never ever included services – the biggest area of business for the UK.
In many ways you have to admire the French for the way they've used the EU to their advantage. Don't you sometimes wish the British government would do this? Despite what appears above we love France and we certainly don't blame its governments for representing the interests of the country.
And for Remoaner MPs we must just add something. Please don't embarrass yourselves trying to argue against our facts. Don't try to say France has a bigger land mass than the UK. France's population is roughly the same as the UK's. In the current EU seven-year budget France is receiving more than double the CAP payments that the UK is getting. In what universe is that remotely reasonable?
We contend that in 1973 the United Kingdom joined an organisation whose whole set of interests did not coincide with its own. This is demonstrated with the information we have provided today and yesterday, and it’s demonstrable in so many other aspects of the EU’s activities and priorities too.
We will continue to expose information which should have been used by Vote Leave in the Referendum campaign, because Remoaner MPs continue to want to fight a decision which the British people have already taken.
With the votes on the Withdrawal and Transition Bill about to take place in Parliament next week, the need has seldom been greater.
Remoaner MPs keep regurgitating their lies. We will keep shining the bright light of Brexit on them and provide ready ammunition for democratic pro-Brexit MPs.
Do support us with a donation if you can.
[ Sources: EU Commission | DEFRA | ONS ]        05.10am, 06 June 2018
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: J Slater, Essex, UK      Date/Time: 06 June 2018, 12.31pm
Message: Not many signs of 'Liberte, Egalite or Fraternite' from the French to other member States in the EU, grabbing the largest funds from the Common Agricultural Policy for themselves. Not brotherly or fraternal at all, when other EU vassal States are in much greater need. But there, that's what you get when shoulders rub shoulders and motivation is far from being 'Egalite'. With Britain's economy doing so much better than the EU's, how about we take back the areas we once ruled, of what is now northern France and the western seaboard? After all our population is crammed into a small country, whereas they have so much spare space. A bonus for the people in these areas would be to truly benefit from a fair and free Democratic System, the British one, and thereby gain a certain 'Liberte' in their lives.
Name: Patrick H, London      Date/Time: 06 June 2018, 11.17am
Message: How does this stack up; when one considers France is the world's sixth largest agricultural producer and EU's leading agricultural powerhouse, accounting for about one-third of all agricultural land within the EU. How are they considered to be, in any way, agriculturally backward? As usual, the British people are being nefariously mugged (literally) by France, Germany, Brussels, etc, aided and abetted by our treacherous Remainers! Do I blame the Continentals, no! Do I dislike these foreign people, no! I blame our own smug Establishment that enjoys the fruit of our taxpayers labour...and all the best goodies on offer from France, Germany, Italy, etc, that money can buy. Good lord old chap....can't stop these wonderful goodies arriving in the UK can we? Therefore, just ignore the irrelevant plebs…how dare they, speak out! Brexit is upsetting these self-serving elites that despise their own common countrymen/women? All these senior public school/Oxbridge Hooray Henrys with their useless PPE degrees, (UK's Government/Lords/Landowners/Banks are full of them) need to express their obscene wealth in the most indulgent manner from the continent and have little care for the real people of Great Britain. And we wonder why these facts are hidden from the public. Thanks again FACTS4EU for exposing this travesty against the British citizens! Now then, where did I put my delicious bottle of Ramos Pinto RP20 20 Year Old Tawny Port? Tally ho!
We believe it contains the kind of information that reasonably-minded Remain voters would have liked to have known before the Referendum. It's all from official sources, so Remoaner MPs will have trouble trying to explain it away.
Why not post comments about it if you're using other sites? The link for the article below is:
No point sending it to Remoaners on social media though - they just waste everyone's time. But you could try sending it to the press or even to the BBC or Sky?
       12.15pm, 05 June 2018
On Friday the EU Commission rolled out its latest plans for a massive area of spending for the EU – the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). The plans cover the period 2021-2027.
  • The total budget for the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) is proposed at €365 billion
  • That’s 28.5% of the entire EU budget
  • Agriculture in the UK represents 0.5% of GDP
  • 40% of the money will be spent on ‘climate action’
  • That’s €146 billion of the total
© Facts4EU.Org 2018
The Commission’s proposals for how to spend the vast €1.135 trillion EU budget have been released piece-by-piece since 02 May. It is regrettable that these have received no attention from the BBC or other broadcasters in the UK.
The UK has been a net contributor to the EU’s CAP budget. In other words it would have been cheaper to have paid farmers directly from the UK budget and billions would have been left over.
According to the Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) on 03 May 2018:
“The agricultural industry, on average, contributes around £9 billion to the national economy and accounts for about 0.5% of national Gross Domestic Product.”
- DEFRA, 03 May 2018
In the chart below we put this into context of the proportion of the total budget which the EU spends on its Common Agricultural Policy.
© Facts4EU.Org 2018
An increasing aspect of all EU documents is the mention of climate change in relation to its expenditure. The proportion of any budget which is allocated to climate change action is now frequently specified. In the case of the Common Agricultural Policy, this proportion has been allocated at 40%.
“In line with the Union's commitment to implement the Paris Agreement and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, actions under the CAP are expected to contribute 40 per cent of the overall CAP budget to climate action.”
- EU Commission statement, 01 June 2018
Commenting to Brexit Facts4EU.Org, UKIP's agriculture spokesman Stuart Agnew MEP said:
“Farmers will now be penalised for failing to improve the world's weather under the so-called climate change objectives. It would be hard to invent a more absurd reason to tax food producers, and no hint is given as to what criteria are used to assess whether the weather has actually improved or not.”
If you were designing a ‘common market’ or ‘european economic community’ - which is what the UK supposedly joined in 1973 - how much of your overall budget would you allocate to farming?
In the 1960s the CAP budget was in effect a gigantic mechanism for transferring money to inefficient farmers – particularly in France – by Germany, in return for Germany’s access to French markets for its industrial output. The CAP represented by far the largest proportion of the total budget.
Even by 1980, CAP expenditure was still running at an astonishing 72% of the total EU budget. By no measure can the EEC have ever been seen as merely a trading bloc – a ‘common market’.
Since then it has been impossible to sustain this gross over-emphasis on just one small part of economic activity. In the UK the size of the agricultural sector is 0.5% of GDP, according to DEFRA in its latest summary released on 03 May 2018.
In the latest figures from the EU Commission on Friday the percentage is 28.5%. Whilst this represents a further fall, it remains grossly disproportionate if the EU is seen as a modern trading bloc, which is what Remainers want the voters to believe.
It should also be recognised that one of the main reasons the percentage of the budget spent on the CAP has fallen is because the EU has steadily added to its activities each year, taking over more and more of each member state’s own business.
In other words, the EU has started spending more on other things, which makes CAP spending seem lower. In fact the total spending on CAP has risen dramatically over the years, from €21 billion in 1980 to €49 billion in 2017, at 2011 prices.
The questions we would like Remoaner MPs to answer are:
  1. Do you really want the UK to stay in an EU spending €365 billion on agriculture?
  2. Do you think voters want to spend 28.5% of the budget on the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy?
  3. Do you think voters want to spend €146 billion of the CAP budget on 'climate action'?
We’re not politicians, but we doubt that the answers to any of those questions would be “Yes”.
Good luck getting re-elected if those are your policies.
If you're a reasonably-minded person who voted Remain in the Referendum, listening to David Cameron, George Osborne and all the 'experts', don't you wish you'd been given simple, basic facts like those above? These facts come from the EU itself, and from the UK government department responsible. They are uncontestable.
We've been churning out facts like these since well before the Referendum. You might wish that someone had given us some funding to spread the messages arising from our research more widely.
However you can still make a difference. If you haven't already done so please support us financially if you can.
Imagine what we could do to thwart the likes of Soubry, Umunna, Clarke, Starmer, Soros and others if we only had your backing? Please make a donation now to help ensure we all get what we voted for. You won't be added to a mailing list and we won't badger you to give again.
[ Sources: EU Commission | DEFRA | ONS ]        06.10am, 05 June 2018
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      Date/Time: 05 June 2018, 09.12am
Message: Wake up UK remain voters this is your tax money, the EU only spends money it gets from the contributing nations. Just think how much the price of food would come down if there were no EU farm subsides and farmers had to compete on a level playing field with the likes of Australia and New Zealand farmers. The only way inefficient EU farmers stay in business is from subsidies. So UK consumers are hit with a double whammy on their food prices, once from taxes from their earnings the British State contributes to the EU, and second from overpriced produce you have to buy from the EU, due to the external tariffs protecting EU farmers from more efficient competition.
Name: W Alkaway, Essex, UK      Date/Time: 05 June 2018, 07.09am
Message: EU bureaucracy has 'oniomania' or compulsive buying/spending obsession. They seem to think that chucking money at problems is always the answer. Hence a whopping 365 billion Euros promise for farming. They clearly have been led to believe, by May's constant capitulations to their demands, that Britain will carry on as their cash cow for ever. Not so. Angela Merkel has already turned down Macron's attempts to establish a central Financial control at Brussels of all member vassal states' spending. She fears Germany would react to being a major contributor to likely oncoming bail-outs for bankrupt member nations. Isn't Germany already facing huge financial strains (steel tariffs/danger of car sales falling/huge costs of the failed African migrants) not the cheap labour the EU dictators expected, but unemployable millions needing homes/education/food/massive law breaking/allowing in Moslem terrorists etc., the costs of all of which are falling on the existing electorate. An electorate who now don't like what is happening to them, in the name of the EU. Bring it on EU dictators. This is like the terminal writhing of a monster in its death throws. I'm enjoying the gripping spectacle, and have booked first row seats!

One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £2
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
             © Easyjet
This is the first of two papers which seek to answer the question:
Why is there a problem with Air Service Agreements on leaving the EU?
The UK has been a member of ICAO since its inception and currently has ASA's with most of the 191 ICAO signatory Countries. The UK has been a pioneer and a giant in the expansion of civil aviation, long before Monnet had his dream of an European superstate.
The answer is that we gave away our rights to negotiate our ASA's to the Brussels Commission in 2005.
Status of the United Kingdom with regard to International Air Law Instruments
The following are the relevant agreements which apply:
Convention on International Civil Aviation Chicago of 7/12/44, effective date 4/4/47
International Air Services Transit Agreement Chicago of 7/12/44, effective date 31/5/45
This is the Declaration by the Government of the United Kingdom in respect of its signature lodged with the depository on 11 March 2005:
“The United Kingdom, member of the European Community, declares that, in accordance with the Treaty establishing the European Community, the Community has competence with respect to certain matters governed by the Protocol. Signature of the Protocol on behalf of the Community will be decided by the competent Community institution in accordance with the provisions of the Treaty”.
What Brexit means to aviation
Leaving the EU means the existing agreements are rescinded. The United Kingdom resumes full ICAO competences and ASA negotiating rights that it held prior to 2005. This is set out in Appendix 5 ICAO Template Air Services Agreement. The UK occupies a special position in ICAO as a Council member.
The Prime Minister said in Florence “the United Kingdom will cease to be a member of the European Union on 29th March 2019.” An implementation period does not mean postponing Brexit.
We will no longer be members of the European Union, the ECAA, nor be full members of EASA. This is regardless of progress in the Brexit negotiations. A transitional period (for Single Market and Customs Union purposes) cannot apply or have any meaning to the renegotiation of an expiring ASA, although some members of the House of Lords are confused about this. A new ASA is the final position.
As a ceased EU member, Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 can no longer apply to the United Kingdom. Renewing or reconfirming the Air Service Agreements splits down into three:
1. ‘Open Skies’ agreement between the United States and the European Union, because the UK's airspace was used as a bargaining tool by the Commission, and multi-lateral negotiating rights will no longer be applicable.
When Open Skies was agreed back in 2007 the UK market was one of the key attractions for the US – at the time the UK accounted for a 40% share of the EU-US market.
The House of Lords has the Open Skies Agreement (Membership) Bill [HL] awaiting Committee stage. What the Government proposes and progress made if any, is in the secong article which will be published shortly.
Talk (by anti-Brexit media) of reverting to Burmuda II and a reduction in the number of designated Air Carriers (we only have two), is ridiculous.
2. Confirmation with 3rd countries where multi-lateral negotiating rights have replaced the United Kingdom as sole signatory reverts to a bi-lateral between that country and the UK.
3. A simple ICAO bi-lateral Air Service Agreement with no strings. With the EU member States, it could be an individual or a multi-lateral agreement. Failure to achieve this is discussed in the second article.
What is currently being done - risks to Brexit
CAA advisers to the Government and civil servants would like to retain membership of the ECAA, it would suit their purpose and make their life easy.
The following paragraph from a leaked document reveals the danger of not making a clean break.
"Believes that, in light of the above principles and conditions, and in the interest of the passengers, air carriers, manufacturers and workers' unions, connectivity has to be ensured by means of an air transport agreement and aviation safety agreement; stresses however this is conditional on the level of regulatory convergence and alignment with EU acquis, and on the setting up of a solid dispute settlement and arbitration mechanism"
Regulatory convergence and alignment with EU acquis can mean many things. It probably means you are not an EU member but are subject to its rules, regulations and political dogma without any say. This will be the position in an implementation period, but the Commission wants it to be forever in a new ASA.
The UK would be on the hook if it wants to be in the ECAA and a full member of EASA.
The EU wants to keep the slice of the cake that controls Civil Aviation in the United Kingdom.
A version of the main findings of the above paper, and the article that will follow tomorrow, was sent to the Rt Hon Lord Tebbit CH for his comments.
Lord Tebbit was formerly an RAF fighter pilot before flying for BOAC. He then entered politics and became a minister in the late Baroness Thatcher's government.
Lord Tebbit replied that he felt the paper was correct in its reasoning and that he had forwarded it to the Rt Hon David Davis MP (Brexit Secretary) and the Rt Hon Chris Grayling (Transport Secretary.)
Don't miss the conclusion of this important topic, which we hope to publish tomorrow.
[ Story by S. Ashurst with the Brexit Facts4EU.Org Team. Sources: Convention on International Civil Aviation Chicago | International Air Services Transit Agreement Chicago | EU Commission ]        04.50am, 05 June 2018
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: R Ellison, Essex, UK      Date/Time: 05 June 2018, 07.40am
Message: 'Sic Itur ad Astra' was my school's motto. So true; we WILL REACH for the stars. We WILL SORT OUT the mess we got into, now called the European Union, by believing the lies of a former Prime Minister. We WILL NOT put up with any more lies from ANY PM. And we WILL HAVE what we voted for. Yet ANOTHER excellent piece of research which our politicians should have already read up on if they were doing their job properly. On Aviation alone, we will be better off taking back the controls, let alone everything else FACTS4EU has published. We WILL KEEP May TO ACCOUNT, and make her keep her promise to get us out, Her repeated mantra to us all 'No deal is better Than a Bad Deal' still rings in our ears. WE WILL NEVER FORGET IT.

One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £2
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
Janez Jansa & his wife Urska Bacovnik last night             © France24
For the third time in three days a new EU member state government is about to be formed, following the elections held yesterday in one of the EU’s newest and smallest members, Slovenia.
At the end of last week Brussels was forced to congratulate the new Italian populist government in Rome, as well as the new Spanish socialist government in Madrid after Mariano Rajoy was ejected following a no confidence vote.
Last night, with 99.9% of the votes counted, it became inevitable that a new government will be formed in Ljubljana, capital of Slovenia.
As we predicted in our article early on Saturday morning, the anti-immigration Slovenska Demokratska Stranka (SDS) party won the most seats. A total of 25 parties contested the election, of which 9 gained seats in the country’s National Assembly.
Below is our chart of the results, which come from Slovenia’s State Election Commission.
© Facts4EU.Org 2018
SDS is led by former Prime Minister Janez Janša. It is a conservative party, commonly referred to in much of the media as ‘right-wing populist’ or ‘far right populist’. We have settled on 'conservative' as an apt description.
Mr Janša will now face the usual difficulties experienced by all political leaders across the continent of trying to put together a coalition government. This can take days, weeks, or - in Germany's case after its elections last year - six months.
The outgoing prime minister Miro Cerar came fourth.
It is worth noting that almost all the political parties in Slovenia are pro-EU. Slovenia joined in 2004 along with Czech Republic, Cyprus, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Malta, Poland and Slovakia.
Mr Janša has been outspoken on the subject of the EU’s forced migrant quotas policy: “Thanks to its (migration) policy, Hungary is a safe country while Belgium, due to its wrong policy, isn't.”  It is this sort of rhetoric that will cause even more headaches in Brussels. In effect Mr Janša has set himself on a collision course with the EU Commission.
Slovenia is a net recipient of EU funding and has therefore mainly experienced the financial benefits of EU membership. It would have been surprising if a majority of Slovenians had been in favour of leaving the EU, only 14 years after it joined and with large sums pouring into its coffers from the taxpayers of countries such as the UK.
It is worth bearing in mind that the country most associated with standing up to Brussels – Viktor Orban’s Hungary – has no appetite amongst its people to leave. Like Slovenia, Hungary is a net beneficiary of funding provided in no small measure by UK taxpayers.
This does not mean that the new government in Slovenia will give no problems to the EU. On the contrary, the leader of the party which gained the most votes yesterday, Janez Janša of the SDS, has adopted the strong rhetoric of the Visegrad countries against the EU’s attempted forced settlement of migrants.
The issue of migrants should not be underestimated in these countries. None of the dissenting governments show any signs of buckling under the pressure being exerted, and legal actions taken, on countries which refuse to submit to EU diktat.
In the last three days three EU member states have changed government or voted to do so. (Slovenia hasn’t changed yet but it is inevitable that it will, once coalition talks have concluded.) It might be supposed that British politicians and commentators would show some interest in the possible views of the new governments when it comes to Brexit, but this doesn’t yet seem to have occured.
Each EU member state will have a vote on any future Brexit deal, so it matters who is in charge.
Right now, the more troubles that Brussels has to deal with the better, in our view. The new Slovenian government is likely to cause more problems for Brussels, particularly over migrants, and this will just add to the general feeling of angst amongst the unelected elites.
With so many problems on its plate, Brussels will be marginally less likely to want Brexit to go worse than it currently is. The EU elites will also feel weaker, with Italy about to introduce policies which are anathema to the EU hierarchy, and now with Slovenia to contend with.
You don’t even have to agree with all the policies of the EU’s more antagonistic member state governments. To an extent, the maxim of ‘my enemy’s enemy is my friend’ applies.
To end on a practical note, it is our view that the British government should be giving active consideration to how to leverage the discontent amongst so many member states, to achieve a better outcome for the UK. We would like to think this is happening.
[ Sources: Državna volilna komisija ]        05.50am, 04 June 2018
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: Jon, Wales      Date/Time: 05 June 2018, 06.18am
Message: Almost all peoples of the Continent of Europe have 'woken-up' to the democratic deficit between nations, and many now openly rebel against Brussels. I find it interesting that Eire appears pro-EU - or is the reality somewhat different perhaps? After all, they were forced into voting several times until they gave Brussels the 'right' answer? Eire is presently a NET contributor to the Brussels machine, and the better their country performs, the more their taxpayers have to contribute to support other EU countries, whether or not they like it. All the people in the Republic should be aware of "Project Ireland 2040"? If not, they can look forward to immigration of around ONE MILLION or more people under the scheme. It will be for the people of the RoI to decide if they're happy about that, but urge them to look over that project.

One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £2
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
“It seems that within the government machine there are those who want to recreate the burdens and responsibilities of membership,
leaving in name only”
“The civil service have had
nearly two years now
to prepare for the UK to leave
the EU without a deal”
- Rt Hon John Redwood MP, Former Sec of State for Wales, Former Minister for Single Market
Today Brexit Facts4EU.Org asked one of the Conservative Party's most stalwart Brexiteers, a former minister with considerable experience and knowledge of the EU, for his comments on the current state of affairs regarding Brexit.
He did not pull his punches.
In a hard-hitting set of comments, Dr John Redwood expressed his obvious concern at the lack of progress made by the government and the civil service in preparing for “No Deal”.
Noticeably he also reinforced the Prime Minister's previous policy that “No Deal is a realistic option and preferable to a Bad Deal”. In the last week there have been many rumours that Theresa May has forbidden cabinet ministers from repeating this pledge. Clearly Dr Redwood wishes to ensure that this policy remains unaltered.
Below we publish verbatim Dr Redwood's exclusive comments to Brexit Facts4EU.Org.
commenting exclusively to
Sunday 03 June 2018
“The civil service have had nearly two years now to prepare for the UK to leave the EU without a deal, and nearly two years to negotiate a good deal if there is a good deal to be had.
“They have another nine months to complete their work if they have found any part of it difficult. They have also been instructed clearly by Ministers that we will be leaving the single market and the Customs Union, and told that No Deal is a realistic option and preferable to a Bad Deal.
“I assume most them have been loyally carrying out those instructions, and that the UK will be ready to leave with No Deal in March next year if necessary.
“It was therefore disappointing to read today that some civil servants are working on a totally implausible Armageddon option if we leave without a deal. Even more bizarre is what it is said to comprise. Apparently the port of Calais would block food exports to the UK!
“This would be against international law. and against the port of Calais’s commercial interests. It would be action welcomed by the Belgian and Dutch ports who would be delighted to replace Calais. It would also be a boost to non-EU food exporters who would love to replace the products from EU farmers on our meal tables.
“The civil servants responsible should be told to do something useful and helpful to the UK. This latest leak is creating a picture of officials seeking to undermine the clear and sensible policy of taking back control of our laws, money, borders and trade policy.
“It seems that within the government machine there are those who want to recreate the burdens and responsibilities of membership, leaving in name only. Ministers must be firm in repeating the agreed policy.”
- Rt Hon Dr John Redwood MP, Wokingham (Con), Sunday 03 June 2018
In our view there are three major points that can be drawn from what John Redwood told our editor.
The first point is that the level of concern at the lack of progress being made on Brexit runs deep. Whilst he just stops short of actually criticising members of the civil service, Dr Redwood's message is clear. He shares the concern prevalent in the country that the civil service is not acting in the interests of the majority who voted for Brexit. We entirely agree with this view.
The second point is that any attempt by the Prime Minister to row back further on the commitments she has made in the last 18 months will go down very badly indeed. Theresa May's list of capitulations to the EU is long and we will not repeat them here, but the latest suggestion that cabinet ministers may no longer say “no deal is better than a bad deal” will not be accepted by true Brexiteers on the Tory benches.
The final point is that Dr Redwood is a loyal member of the Conservative Party. For him to tell us in terms that the no deal option must be pursued with vigour and that “The civil servants responsible should be told to do something useful and helpful to the UK” - this is almost unprecedented.
We urge you to look at his last two paragraphs again. In effect he is saying that the normal expectation of the average voter - that the government and its officials are pursuing the stated Brexit policies - is untrue.
When someone as loyal to the government as Dr Redwood speaks to us in such a fashion, it's time for the country to listen.
To end on an optimistic note, in John Redwood ordinary people have a steadfast champion of Brexit. We hold no particular candle for any MP, but are always happy to point out when someone is resolute in the face of the Remainer majority in the Commons and Lords.
We are sending this article to the mainstream news and Brexit organisations, and hope that they cover this immediately. If they wish they may contact us here.
[ Sources: The Rt Hon Dr John Redwood MP ]
       5.25pm, Sunday 03 June 2018
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: Jon, Wales      Date/Time: 05 June 2018, 07.22am
Message: May I suggest in addition to Brexit Facts4EU, Brexiteers sign up to "John Redwood's Diary" (link below). Dr Redwood writes daily Brexit issues and his brief daily blog is automatically delivered to your inbox. I've found his comments useful to our common cause over the years, which doubly ensures we know what the Houses of Parliament (and Civil Servants) are up to, re Brexit. Though of course, the detailed FACTS we get from Facts4EU are original and from official sources which cannot be challenged. Today [5th June] Dr Redwood writes about "EU Withdrawal Bill".
Name: Chris, Devizes, UK      Date/Time: 04 June 2018, 10.31am
Message: As always, these are very fine words from John. However, what we desperately need now is action, to change the course of Brexit, before it is too late. We have long been aware that the Civil Service is overwhelmingly pro-EU, and has been doing everything it can to keep us in the EU in all but name. But the biggest problem is Theresa May. As a Remainer, she has shown herself to be completely incapable of leading, or negotiating. She has given in to every single demand the EU has made, offered an illegal £40bn payment, and has got nothing in return. Either she is just staggeringly inept and incompetent, or she is actively complicit in trying to thwart Brexit. We knows she lies constantly. Twice she lied to the House that she wouldn't accept the NI terms in the Phase 1 agreement, and then agreed to it. She is now trying to extend the pointless transition period by another 2 years to 2023 too. She MUST be forced to stand down, and a pro-Brexit leader put in her place. John Redwood and his colleagues need to bite the bullet and trigger a vote of no confidence. It may lead to a General Election, but I am totally convinced that the strong charismatic pro-Brexit leader would give the Tories a comfortable overall majority. It is telling that two prominent Conservative Party donors have recently echoed my thoughts, and they will clearly not continue their financial support if May remains in charge.
Name: Constantin St Helen, South East, UK      Date/Time: 03 June 2018, 8.23pm
Message: For the sake of Brexit, John needs to concentrate his fire on the 220 or so Tory MP fence-sitters whom Greening is trying to glue to the 'sensible Brexit' notion. Perhaps even to the dozen Tory MP treasonous renegades who include Clarke, Soubry, Grieve, Morgan, Sandbach, S. Hammond, Neill, Heald, Wollaston, Djanogly, Allen. Their cards are marked. Traitors one and all.
Name: Pepper Assault      Date/Time: 03 June 2018, 7.46pm
Message: They never intended for the Brexit decision to be implemented
Name: Ben, Roehampton, UK      Date/Time: 03 June 2018, 7.24pm
Message: Well said. Nice to see someone speaking up for a change. It's as we all suspected.
Name: Paul A, East Sussex, UK      Date/Time: 03 June 2018, 5.53pm
Message: Just a thought here, FYI only... Mayhaps the 'civil'servants who are working for the 48% / remoaners could (or indeed should) have their pay (and pensions) reduced by 52%.... so that they receive pro rata pay for the work they are doing. That might focus their work ethic a little. Best, Paul.

One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £2
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
The May government continues to be unable to form a clear policy for the issue of the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic.
Only this week yet another idea was floated - that of a ‘buffer zone’ of 10 miles either side of the border in which both EU and UK laws would prevail in some form of demilitarised joint command structure. Worryingly, it was widely reported that this came from the DExEU department itself.
The idea was promptly and quite rightly shot down by the DUP and others. The fact that this idea even surfaced is indicative of the dire state of the British government's whole Brexit operation.
Brexit Facts4EU.Org decided to bring you a new perspective, to demonstrate how this issue is not an issue at all and that it has simply been weaponised by Brussels and by the Irish government of Leo Varadkar and Simon Coveney.
Below we present a fresh perspective which might make everyone think a little differently.
A French law introduced by President Macron before he became French president means it’s now more expensive and more difficult than ever to export to France.
What follows is the scenario for British companies wishing to export goods to France, but it should be noted that this applies to all other countries bordering France: to Germany, Luxembourg, Belgium, Switzerland, Italy and Spain. It also applies to all other countries inside and outside the EU which have lorries travelling through other countries into France.
You’re a British truck driver. You’ve managed to cross the Channel and get through Calais without your windscreen being smashed. (This has happened many times.) You think you can now relax until the journey home.
Think again, you poor Rosbif.
A gendarme stops you in northern France. “Vos papiers?” he asks icily, with the customary Gallic charm reserved for visiting Britons. You hand him your passport and logbook.
“Non Monsieur, votre Déclaration de Détachement s’il vous plait,” he says, looking at you in a ‘betcha don’t have one of them’ way, as he reaches for his bulging instant fines pad.
British haulage companies delivering to France must now comply with the following:
  • Have a Representative Office/Person in France
  • A new 5-page document in the vehicle – the ‘Déclaration de Détachement’
  • The driver’s employment contract in the vehicle – translated into French
  • Proof the driver is paid at least the French minimum wage, additional payments for overtime, compulsory wage supplements
  • Contract with a French Représentant, written in French and stating the following:
  • Full personal and company details of Représentant in France
  • His or her acceptance of appointment
  • Effective date and duration of the appointment (must be valid for 18 months after driver is stopped)
  • Location where the documents are kept, and copies of the driver’s payslips
  • Fines range from €400 up to €2750 per offence.
It is important to stress that this is the French law right now. It applies to drivers and companies from all EU member states. Alas it doesn't matter if you are from a country that is part of the 'Single Market' or 'Customs Union'.
It is a simple fact that crossing the French border with goods - even if you come from an EU country - involves an inordinate amount of paperwork and considerable costs.
The above is part of what's called 'Macron's Law', named after the former Economy Minister - now the President of France, Emmanuel Macron - the darling of Brussels because of his advocacy of a federal EU.
The law was supposedly designed to liberate France from some of its more draconian working practices and make it more competitive.
It came into force in July of 2016, after more than 3000 amendments were lodged in the French Parliament and the Government was forced to put it through under executive privilege.
If the UK put this forward as a law they were proposing to introduce in Northern Ireland - and in the rest of the UK come to that - the EU would be in uproar. What would be even more galling would be the false outrage from the treacherous Remoaners in Parliament who would condemn it to the rafters.
And yet this is the reality today, for British hauliers crossing the border into France. This is the reality even without Brexit.
The treatment of the EU and the Irish government of the issue of the Northern Ireland border is simply scandalous.
Solutions exist already. If the EU and the Republic genuinely had the interests of its citizens and businesses at heart they would have reached a simple agreement last year.
The only thing stopping a solution is politics. Politics from Brussels, from Dublin, and from the shameful and ignorant Remainer politicians in Westminster.
Merci de votre attention.
[ Sources: French Ministère de l'Environnement, de l'Energie et de la Mer | Numerous legal and transport association sites ]
       06.55am, Sunday 03 June 2018
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: ArtisaNCO15, UK      Date/Time: 03 June 2018, 10.30am
Message: This shows how our governments and civil servants have always applied EU directives to the letter, whether it helped or hindered the UK. Other countries have taken them to be almost advisory!
Name: Mattstone, UK      Date/Time: 03 June 2018, 10.25am
Message: This one from Facts4eu.Org is a must read for Theresa May, Jacob Rees-Mogg, David Davis and the Conservatives as a whole. The Irish border non issue is being weaponised by our and the EU government and its really just an excuse.
Name: Howard O Jones, UK      Date/Time: 03 June 2018, 10.15am
Message: This is outrageous behaviour by France and it appears that very few people in the uk are aware of it, it needs wide exposure, especially when Soros gets on his high horse.
Name: Roger Hall, UK      Date/Time: 03 June 2018, 10.14am
Message: Fascinating insight, which I'm sure very few people are aware of.

One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £2
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
When it comes to negotiating there is one thing about which all experienced business people will agree.
If you don’t show you’re ready to walk away, you’ll be walked over.
In this morning’s Mail on Sunday, former First Secretary of State and Theresa May’s right-hand man Damian Green ably demonstrates the sheer idiocy of a large section of the political class. In an opinion piece about Brexit he authoritatively advocates the complete opposite of a fundamental tenet of negotiation strategy.
“One very damaging and misguided line of argument is that Britain is all-powerful in these negotiations, so the mere threat of our walking away will bring the Europeans promptly to heel. This is not just a misnomer: the fact that it is so clearly unrealistic has the effect of making Britain look even weaker.
“I am afraid that even my friend, the intelligent and energetic Jacob Rees-Mogg, who runs the European Research Group inside the Conservative Party, occasionally lapses in this way.”
Green, you’re a naïve idiot. Green by name…
You went to Balliol College Oxford and read PPE – the degree of wannabe Westminster windbags. You have only ever worked as a journalist and in politics. You have never worked in business. You have never been involved in generating real wealth.
You don’t have a clue about the real world and how to win. You couldn’t negotiate a roundabout without exiting on the road you entered from. And on top of all of that you're a Remoaner.
Damian Green is no longer in government but he is symptomatic of the May approach. He only left because of a sex scandal, which he denies.
72% of the cabinet voted Remain, as did the majority of the senior ranks of the civil service. As an indication of the latter, all former heads of civil service departments in the Lords are busy supporting motions to bring down Brexit.
In short we are being led into battle by generals who want to sue for peace before a shot is fired.
Time is desperately short but we could yet assemble a top team of business people with proven track records to lead the negotiations with the European Union. We are sure the likes of James Dyson, Richard Tice, Arron Banks, Peter Cruddas, Tim Martin, and many others would all step up to the plate if asked.
Political leadership could be provided by pro-Brexit MPs with both cabinet and business experience, such as the Rt Hon Owen Paterson MP and the Rt Hon John Redwood MP. The former was Northern Ireland Secretary and also Secretary of State for the Environment, and the latter was Margaret Thatcher's Single Market Minister. Each of them has negotiated with Brussels and each knows a thing or two.
They would do a far better job in half the time than the current crop of wasters have managed. And if they felt an extra understanding of the mindset of the EU opposition was required I would join them, for what it's worth. And yes, I do have years of experience of international deals, unlike Mr Damian Green.
From the start, Brexit Facts4EU.Org has consistently argued that the EU would never negotiate a rational deal with the UK. Nevertheless we backed the government as any loyal citizens would at such a moment. As time has passed – and goodness how it has passed – we have increasingly found ourselves unable to support Mrs May as Prime Minister.
Now we wish to be very clear. With nine months to go, the time for hoping is over. The time for stepping into the ring and grasping the Brussels bull by the horns is upon us.
All government departments must now be fully and urgently engaged in preparations for a ‘no deal’ outcome. And a new leader is needed urgently who can deliver the true, clean Brexit which the majority of the British people voted for.
Judging from our postbag the Conservative Party’s long-term future is at stake if it doesn’t now realise and accept what needs to be done – and does it.
This is the biggest political and economic change in our lifetimes. The electorate will never forgive a party that wantonly messes it up.
[ Sources: Mail on Sunday ]        Editorial, Sunday 04.45am, 03 June 2018
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: Ste, Yorkshire, UK      Date/Time: 03 June 2018, 09.20am
Message: [Off Topic] I have been a member of yougov for about 8 years, I joined because I was sick of hearing about the results of polls, which always appear to favour the liberal agenda. After being a member for so many years I can tell you that yougov engineer the result they want, they only ask the people they think will give the result they want and as a brexiteer they have never asked me on any of the so called polls. I wonder if you could run a campaign to expose this or ask readers and brexiteers to join the site. Up to elections many many paid Soros momentum trolls suddenly joined to try and skew polls and results, so maybe a time for the reasonable people
Name: J Slater, Essex, UK      Date/Time: 03 June 2018, 08.33am
Message: I agree, THE TIME FOR ACTION IS NOW! Short of turning up outside Parliament, waving placards and being moved on by the Police, what can we Jo Public do? The thick stone walls of Westminster will not protect those inside from the inevitable consequences: the Tories being voted out, and for ever. Maybe Theresa May doesn't care, but many others do. This will only be the start of a huge political clean-up. The House of Lords will not escape scrutiny and a clear-out. The Country is ripe for change.
And what you, Facts 4EU, suggest about industrialists/ successful entrepreneurs and business people, such as Mr Dyson and others, taking over the negotiations with the EU is spot-on. The 'politicos' have proven they are helplessly inadequate, out of their depth, and basically not up to the task. And what we can do, immediately, is install the Macron Rules along the Irish Border. When the EU bureaucrats start squealing, direct them to arch Federalist and Europhile Mr Macron. After all, 'What's Good for the Goose is Good for the Gander.'
Name: Brexiteer, Braintree, Essex      Date/Time: 03 June 2018, 05.19am
Message: It is interesting that every "Remainer", never states why we should remain in the EU. What exactly we will be missing out on for our annual £12 billion plus add ons contribution. It can't be the trade, our trade is increasing with the rest of the world despite tariffs but declining with the EU, perhaps its the regulations and directives? Well our own elected MP's could do that, or are they incapable? So far I cannot think of one advantage of staying shackled to the EU. Sovereignty brings so many advantages: our own independent foreign policy, our own independent Defence policy as part of NATO, our control of our borders to admit qualified people from anywhere in the world who will be beneficial to our country. So please let me know what's not to like from that?
To be honest there are no cute puppies, abandoned children
or even a snow leopard on the Facts4EU team...
...But we do work very hard.
   Do you think you can still help us   
to keep up the good work?
One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £2
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
(Anonymity respected completely if you prefer to remain private)
This list is being updated.
       Best regards, the Facts4EU.Org Team
© Quirinale Palace
  • Yesterday: New Italian Prime Minister sworn in
  • Today: New Spanish Prime Minister to be sworn in
  • Tomorrow: Slovenia will vote, new Prime Minister inevitable
Over the course of 3 days, 3 of the EU governments will change. Two already have: Italy and Spain.
Agreement was finally reached between the visitors of the Italian general election and the autocratic pro-EU president of Italy, Sergio Mattarella. Signor Mattarella has accepted a compromise candidate for the position of Finance Minister, with the original nominee taking the position of Europe Minister.
As a result, the new Italian cabinet was sworn in at the Quirinale palace in Rome yesterday.
Meanwhile in Madrid, the scandal-hit government of arch-Europhile Mariano Rajoy fell. This followed the convictions of 29 people on Thursday on counts of corruption over government contracts. They were sentenced to a total of 351 years in prison. The crimes included kickbacks to Prime Minister Rajoy’s Popular Party, which was ordered to pay back over £200,000.
The judge said the party had been involved in “an authentic and efficient system of institutional corruption via mechanisms to manipulate public tenders at the national, regional and local level”, and the party’s former Treasurer was one of those convicted. Many more trials are under-way.
The Popular Party of Mr Rajoy is one of the darlings of Brussels, as a result of its unswerving loyalty to the Commission and Council. It thereby managed to avoid any criticism or action by the EU for its internationally-condemned treatment of the Catalan people and its politicians after the independence vote last year.
Many senior Catalan politicians are facing trials likely to result in decades-long imprisonment and the Spanish government has continued to file EU Arrest Warrants for Catalan politicians who have based themselves in countries across the EU.
The new Spanish government is headed by Pedro Sánchez, leader of the Spanish Workers’ Socialist Party (PSOE). He will be sworn in by the Spanish king today.
Tomorrow Slovenians go to the polls. We hope that Slovenians will forgive us, but some readers may need reminding about Slovenia.
Slovenia became an independent country in 1990, having formerly been part of Yugoslavia. It joined NATO and the EU in 2004, and adopted the Euro as its currency in 2007.
Slovenia may be small – population 2 million, GDP less than 2% that if the UK – but it has a vote in the EU Council like any of the other 27 members.
Tomorrow the Slovenians are highly likely to elect a new government, led by Janez Janša. Mr Janša has recently been talking with Hungary’s Viktor Orban, and it is highly likely that if he wins tomorrow, Slovenia will start pursuing an anti-immigration policy.
So there you have it. Three new EU governments in three days. Each of them with a vote on the EU Council which will approve or reject any Brexit deal.
You would have thought that the mainstream media would have picked up on this, or one of the large, well-funded Brexit organisations. But no. You had to come here to find out.
If we had more resource – and therefore more time – we could analyse the policies of each new government in more detail. If we were the British government we would certainly be looking at how to influence these new governments in the UK’s favour. Sadly, with a Civil Service which is heavily pro-Remain, we doubt this will be happening.
Already the new Italian government has been making very positive noises, saying that the UK must under no circumstances be punished for Brexit and that a moderate line should be taken.
Now is the time for the UK to be exploring new alliances within the EU. We don’t care what Juncker and Tusk say about ‘unity’ and ‘solidarity’ – we see little of this amongst the rising tide of populist thinking across the continent.
If we were involved we would be having exploratory albeit quiet talks with the four countries of the Visegrad Group – Hungary, Poland, Czech Republic and Slovakia - plus the new Austrian government which could well join them, plus the new Slovenian government.
We see a new future for the UK post-Brexit. A future that is predominantly globally-facing. A future that still encompasses dialogue with the EU elites in Brussels, but which at the same time involves increasing bilateral contacts at individual government level across the EU.
If the British government would like us to start making the overtures in private, we are more than happy to do so. After all, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office is full of Remoaners who won’t be in the least bit interested.
[ Sources: Various ]        08.20am, 02 June 2018
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: Hugh, Midlands      Date/Time: 02 June 2018, 11.24pm
Message: One can only hope that the pusillanimous twerps currently forming our government have noted Barnier's reported comments while taking their weekend's leisure. 'It is hard for the British to understand that we do not wish to negotiate, we do not want to compromise on what we are. We are waiting for the British to have clear positions and choices.' I realise that May is up the creek after the disastrous election result on that rubbish manifesto, but it must become clear to her and the cabinet of remainers that continuing to attempt negotiations is futile. Only after going for no deal, no ex gratia payments to EU coffers and no ECJ, EHCR commitments will any position of strength develop in future dealings with EU. Let them make an Irish border to their liking; Eire would be the worse for it. Our money is all that they understand. Do not give the EU anything for nothing. Dump Galileo and the fisheries policy. Any security assistance from GCHQ and to EU defence force should be withheld pending any quid pro quo.
Name: Not4EU, London      Date/Time: 02 June 2018, 3.34pm
Message: Reply to David Corbett: I agree with what you say, particularly the last paragraph, with one exception. If we do not leave the EU, or it's in name only due to the poor deal that's being 'engineered' through treasonous collusion to keep us under EU control, I will not peacefully 'campaign' for a better deal, as they have already shown contempt for our democratic decision. The EU 'wants' us to accept an awful deal. They retain control of us and our money and better still, we can't complain. A reversal of the vote means the same thing. Win/win for them. Anything other than a clean exit - full control of our laws, borders, territory, governance and economy - will just prove conclusively that democracy is dead in this country. There is an old saying (paraphrased), that when democratic change is no longer achievable by the ballot box, then it will be sought by alternate means. I am ready for that day. No deal, clean exit.
Name: David Corbett, North West of England      Date/Time: 02 June 2018, 2.13pm
Message: Recently A.C.Grayling, a man who has been campaigning against Brexit for years, urged Guy Verhofstadt to be 'very, very tough and uncompromising on a deal' to make the electorate 'regret' our decision to leave the bloc. I am completely bewildered (not to say annoyed) by Grayling's behaviour. Mr Grayling (like anyone in this country) is entitled to his opinions, but what gives someone, who has never held elected office, the right to lobby senior politicians? Why does he want his country to suffer the wrath of Brussels?
Grayling believes that Britain is the equivalent of an innocent man sentenced to death by a misinformed jury, yet rather than push for a reprieve, is urging the hangman to ensure the rope is short, and the condemned man's death is as prolonged and painful as possible, in order to make the jury change their minds. I struggle to understand why he is pushing for a bad deal, does he want Britain to be economically hit, just so he can be smug? Does he truly believe that if a bad deal goes through, with his assistance, and the country is adversely affected everyone will suddenly listen to his viewpoint? If this happens, he is more likely to be branded a nasty bully and an elitist snob. (Personally speaking if a bad deal is ratified by the Commons, I will campaign for a better one, and I imagine a lot of Brexiteers will follow suit).
Grayling seems to be showing signs of double think; if he believes Brexit is irretrievably bad, then why does he need he need to go to the trouble of ensuring it is bad? If he feels compelled to lobby for a poor deal, this implies he believes a good deal is possible. His motives are sinister; the great unwashed defied the wisdom of our betters and therefore we must be punished. Then when we realise our mistake (a self-fulfilling prophecy by-the-way) we will come back, caps doffed, begging to be told what to do by the elites.
In 1924 the chattering classes, hoped the new Labour government would fail. They waited gleefully for Ramsey Macdonald to bankrupt Britain, thus deterring the newly emancipated working classes from voting for parties that were outside the established order. When he resigned after only nine months the country was intact; and within five years he returned to office. The elites are on the same side of those who opposed the Macdonald government; they fear that a successful Brexit will morph Britain from an 'elective dictatorship' a phrase coined by the late Quentin Hogg) to a direct democracy. During the Brexit referendum the elites did everything they could to blind us with science, and convince us that Brexit would cause the sky to fall in. We ignored them, and the great calamity they predicted never came. Osborne and Cameron had no choice other than to shuffle off the stage, as they were exposed as self-serving charlatans. If the powers that be are no longer able to intimidate us into doing what we want, then who knows where it could lead; maybe towards a country in which people have a say over how their lives are run, who runs them, and how their money is spent. To me this a ideal system of government (it works perfectly well in Switzerland), but to Grayling this is apparently dystopian (he strongly objects to the fact this was decided by a referendum).
Grayling seems convinced a poor deal will result in Britain returning to the EU. I ask him this, if your spouse wants a divorce, and you hope you will ultimately reconcile, do you honestly believe an adversarial divorce achieves that? Encouraging them to be more cruel will simply harden the resolve of leavers, and even persuade remainers to switch sides. Ultimately this will alienate the EU from a potential global trading partner; which will cause self-inflicted hardship and make other countries more inclined to abandon the sinking ship. If nothing else it will confirm what the likes of Dan Hannan have been saying for decades; the EU is unreformable. Ask yourself this, if this is how the EU treat us when we want to leave, how do you imagine they'd treat us if we stayed?
Name: Patrick H, London      Date/Time: 02 June 2018, 12.18pm
Message: One wonders, would it be possible to instigate a new relationship with these dissenting European countries that are possibly ripe for a new way forward; away from the all-consuming insidious Brussels apparatus? A new cooperative perhaps: Britain, Italy, Spain, Visegrad Group, Slovenia, Norway, Switzerland, Holland?, France?, Denmark?...let's call it a "Common market"...not so silly now!
Name: W Alkaway, Essex, UK      Date/Time: 02 June 2018, 12.17pm
Message: I too am an avid reader of Facts4EU. It is so, so refreshing to read such trustworthy, honest and up-to-date analysis. For ever grateful that you all, Facts4EU Team, work so diligently on behalf of this Country. Because of your refreshingly intelligent and clearly put evidence, done by hours of hard slog, we can truly understand what exactly is going on. The machinations of organisations such as the BBC and the Civil Service Heads will ultimately be their undoing. People despise being misled and lied to. Good will prevail in the end. So delighted you keep going. Another donation winging its way to you, and gladly given.
Reply: Gosh. Thank you so much, you're very kind.
Name: Patrick F, Kent      Date/Time: 02 June 2018, 09.00am
Message: I read your work everyday.
It is the best single source I know of that utterly refutes the EU and the Remain position.
Facts will defeat the lies. Keep believing and please keep working as hard as you do!
Viva Brexit (as we say in the UK ;-) Permission to publish if you choose.
Regards, Patrick F
Reply: Thank you Patrick, and thanks also for the donation.

One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £2
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
Yesterday the Spanish government of Prime Minister Rajoy was ousted in a parliamentary putsch over its conviction for major fraud.
In advance of this, the BBC’s Europe Editor, Katya Adler, tweeted about the crisis and effectively backed the sitting pro-EU Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy.
Mr Rajoy, loved by the EU elites in Brussels for his unswerving support of the EU hierachy and hated by many in Catalonia for his draconian put-down of Catalan independence, suffered a defeat in a vote of confidence in the Spanish parliament in Madrid.
He was replaced as Prime Minister by Pedro Sánchez, leader of the Spanish Workers’ Socialist Party (PSOE).
Prior to the vote, the BBC’s political editor tweeted what amounted to a defence of Mr Rajoy’s government.
© Twitter
The BBC’s view, as reported by its Europe Editor, is that “Contrary to some explosive newspaper headlines in non-Spanish media, Spain is NOT in ‘meltdown’. Its economy is very much on the up and if the no confidence vote against PM Rajoy is successful today it will immediately be replaced by a government lead by mainstream PM”
Brexit Facts4EU.Org replied, pointing out that the picture in Spain is perhaps less rosy than Ms Adler is making out.
© Twitter
Unemployment in Spain was at 17.2% in 2017, according to the EU’s official Eurostat figures. The UK’s was at 4.4%. This means that Spain’s unemployment rate is almost FOUR TIMES that of the UK.
We then gave the BBC’s Europe Editor the data on youth unemployment in Spain, which was a breathtaking 38.6% for 2017. This is OVER THREE TIMES the rate of 12.1% in the UK.
© Facts4EU.Org 2018
Unemployment is a fairly good barometer of the health of an economy. A generation of young Spaniards has now grown up with the expectation that around 40% will be out of work at any given time. Even for unemployment across all ages the situation is very bad indeed, with almost one in six Spaniards unemployed.
It is worth remembering that Spain benefited from an economic bailout package from the Eurozone to the tune of €100bn from 2012-2014. This is in addition to the billions it receives each year as a net recipient of EU funds.
It was only in Q2 last year that Spain’s GDP reached the level it had been 10 years earlier, back in 2008.
© Facts4EU.Org 2018
Above you can see how the UK economy dipped in 2009 after the global economic crisis, before continuing its upward trend. On the other hand Spain has only just recovered, after 10 years.
Spain’s growth rate is currently higher than the UK’s, but from a more depressed base. Whilst the current growth rate is good, it does not perhaps warrant the impression that Ms Adler of the BBC wished to present.
Later we looked at tweets which Ms Adler had added to the original one we commented on. Here is one such tweet:-
© Twitter
“No party of real significance that would stand in new elections - not even Podemos - is eurosceptic and populist nationalist to the extent of Italy’s new governing coalition.”
The BBC’s Europe Editor seemed to want to reassure any readers that there was no need to panic and that there was no possibility of – shock, horror – a populist party gaining power in Spain, as in Italy.
This article covers but a moment in the total output of the BBC. However it is indicative of the malaise at the heart of BBC News and Current Affairs and is typical. Ms Adler’s tweets yesterday just happen to be a small example of the problem which is pervasive and insidious. And given that she is the BBC’s Europe Editor – a prestigious position which no doubt carries with it a very impressive salary and benefits package - we thought it worth commenting on.
Had she tweeted about the Spanish economy at another time, Ms Adler’s tweet would have seemed more innocuous. However it was timed just hours before the most significant vote in Spain’s parliamentary history. A sitting government was on the verge of being unseated – the first time that this had happened in the youngest democracy in Western Europe.
It’s important to realise that the BBC still has a reputation for impartiality and accuracy in many parts of the world. So when Ms Adler speaks it is quite likely that many European parliamentarians will be ‘following’ her on Twitter, as the jargon goes. Perhaps even in Spain.
However this BBC reputation, we suggest, is based on its performance in previous decades.
Was it appropriate or necessary for this senior BBC figure to tweet so positively about the Spanish economy while discussing Senor Rajoy and his government, just hours before a crucial vote in the Spanish parliament?
It’s possible that the BBC’s Europe Editor doesn’t actually read the reports which the EU churns out each day. It’s equally possible that she doesn’t know how to access the EU’s database of economic statistics.
If she did either of these, she would know the unemployment rate. She would also know that the Spanish economy is only just producing as much as it was 10 years ago.
Unemployment in Spain is a terrible drain on real people with real lives and whilst it is better than a year ago it remains very high. We think that many Spaniards might disagree with Ms Adler’s characterisation of the Spanish economic situation for them.
We wonder when Ms Adler last visited each country of the EU? Has she in fact ever visited them all? Dr Adler has British nationality and was brought up in a German-speaking household as her parents are German. She started her journalism career as a correspondent for ORF, the Austrian TV channel, and subsequently worked for Deutsche Welle (German equivalent of the World Service) whilst also working at the BBC.
With the best will in the world and without wishing to personalise things, is she reporting from a perspective which might be recognised by the majority of British people? When was the last time she socialised with anyone who is pro-Brexit?
The BBC refuses to accept that it has any institutional bias against Brexit. Sorry Auntie, but this is absolute rubbish.
The BBC demonstrates its bias in almost every aspect of its coverage. Take the flagship programme Question Time, where the panellists are 90% anti-Brexit. Or take the regular drip-drip feed of Remainer-biased content, which is what we have tried to illustrate in this story about Spain. We deliberately chose a relatively minor issue like this precisely because it is the continuous bias that is so wearing for so many people.
The problem is that the BBC elites are so arrogant that they can’t even see the problem. We have said it before, and we’ll say it again. The only solution now is a root and branch reform of the organisation from the top down. Failing that, we would rather that it were hived off as a commercial enterprise.
Perhaps then we would see how many people were prepared to pay for its poor quality journalism and institutionalised bias.
[ Sources: Twitter | EU Commission | BBC ]        05.50am, 02 June 2018
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: Clive Glover      Date/Time: 03 June 2018, 10.53am
Message: I should like to comment on your article about BBC bias. I am a leave voter and appreciate your detailed research and comments.
However I think you are very wrong and unfair in your comments on Katya Adler. She is a very experienced journalist who speaks several European languages fluently - including Italian. She was in Italy for the recent elections and again this week for the final approval of the new government. Then on Friday she flew to Spain to cover the no confidence vote against the prime minister there. She files lots of reports from around Europe for radio and TV, writes aBlog and Tweets a lot. Unfortunately many of her reports are not used by BBC News editors especially on TV (I have complained about this as for example they cut her report on the Italian general election to about 20seconds where my editorial judgement would have made it the main story that day!
Katya Adler spends many days and weeks flying around Europe and sending reports which are often not used on air. I agree with you there is bias within BBC News against any criticism of the EU but it is at editorial level NOT reporters like her. She is also one of a group of BBC reporters - the others are Chris Mason, Adam Fleming and Laura Kuensberg - who have taken things into their own hands and produce a weekly Podcast called “Brexitcast” which is one of the most popular podcasts in the country. It is also broadcast on 5 Live and there was a TV version on BBC News one week. If you listen to that you will discover the reporters have a very fair view of the realities of the negotiations and the people involved on all sides. In this podcast they have the time to discuss seriously and in some depth. I recommend it to you.
And maybe you could apologise to Dr Adler. by the way I don’t know her personally but I have come to admire her knowledge and experience through listening to her reports and discussions.
Reply: Hi Chris, thanks for your reply. We only have time for a quick response, alas. Unlike those working for the BBC we're not highly paid journalists and it's Sunday!
Ms Adler is the BBC's Europe Editor. If one of us held that position we'd resign in protest if "BBC News editors" refused to use our filings of reports as much as you say happens to Ms Adler. What does "Europe Editor" mean in the BBC, if it doesn't mean a say in editorial decisions?
Like Ms Adler we speak several languages fluently, so we don't see that as being relevant. We know the BBC Brexit podcast of course, and the outputs of the other journalists you mention. We also knew Ms Adler's movements last week, because she posted them online.
Unfortunately we hold a different view to you of the podcast and the journalists you list. The anger at the BBC is widespread and what we said in the article is extremely mild compared to what readers have said to us in NFP emails and on social media. On this subject we're afraid we will have to agree to differ, as the role of the BBC is pivotal. An impartial and informed BBC would truly be wonderful, but we see little hope for that. Please feel free to reply but we'll be unable to respond because of having to work on other things. Thank you for appreciating our research.
Name: Patrick H, London      Date/Time: 02 June 2018, 1.36pm
Message: In my own circle of friends, family, neighbours and colleagues, there is a significant distrust of all things politically drafted by the BBC/ITV/C4/SKY, et al. We are no longer taken in so easily. It no longer matters how they twist the truth, use copious sophistic dialogue, use canted editorial sleight of hand bias or circumvent the truth with delusive articles, tweets or false flags, such as Ms Adler's, who no doubt will defend her enormous tax paid BBC compensation package to the death; to the point where real facts and truths are discarded cynically in a very typically corrupt Brussels 'nose in the trough' flagrant manner. Those (establishments, so-called journalists, politicians, secretive NGOs or indeed celebs and corporations) that are so vehemently and nefariously anti-Brexit, and therefore anti-British almost certainly, in some way or another, have their noses in a financial (EU/Soros funded) trough and will seek to destroy anybody who poses a threat, or who will negate their personal financial advantages. Human nature always raises its ugly side when pieces of silver are on offer (something Soros is only too aware of, aka, insatiable greed), Ms Adler is no different!
Name: Brexiteer, Braintree, Essex      Date/Time: 02 June 2018, 12.30
Message: I was taught, who, what, when, where, how, check and check again. It is so much simpler now to check with the internet to get it right every time. That is if you want to, if you have an agenda or the "facts" don't fit the narrative you publish the half truths. The problem with that is you get found out, or when the reader just happens to recognise that what you have written is untrue you destroy all future trust in the subsequent articles you write. Once you lose the public trust in what you write, after a time readers don't read your articles anymore. Because they don't trust you. I personally don't listen to the BBC Today radio programme anymore, despite starting listening in the days of Jack de Manio and Brian Redhead. For that one reason I can't trust the "news" they produce.
Name: Not4EU, London      Date/Time: 02 June 2018, 09.42am
Message: The BBC nowadays is an institution that Goebbels would have been proud of. It truly is Orwell's 'Ministry of Truth' made flesh. I say this as an ex-employee of many years working there (I am now ashamed to say). It has not been 'Auntie' for some time, but the referendum stripped away the 'for show' veils of impartiality & independence for many exposing it as the main organ of propaganda which is forcibly paid for by UK taxpayers on pain of a prison sentence & a criminal record.
So what are we paying for? It's not news. It's not 'Here are the full facts for you to draw your own conclusions.' It's the opinions of their 'experts' on the news/events, all towing the permitted agenda line. Facts/Events don't fit with 'the message'? Omit them. Pet project contributors restating already proved lies? Don't challenge & the lie will become a 'fact' to be quoted. Topload all News & Current Affairs shows with pro-EU lackeys, to spin the story that the country didn't really vote to leave. They really think that the people are stupid. They are a disgrace.
Name: Jon, Wales      Date/Time: 02 June 2018, 08.35am
Message: An excellent article again exposing BBC bias. Perhaps BBC's Europe Editor, Ms Adler, will now consider setting her record straight. In the UK we are compelled by law to pay for an annual TV licence to watch BBC television. When they get minor issues so clearly wrong, we must seriously question once again whether or not it is time to scrap the licence fee, and send UK 'TV Licensing' to the dustbin of history? When they get things so wrong on social media, it is to be frank, unforgivable. Whilst I'm certain Ms Adler is a pleasant character, I expect all representatives of our National Broadcaster to present the FACTS. Why should Brexit have to correct the errors of BBC [and others] just to ensure the facts are out there (and they do so on a shoestring).

One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £2
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
On Wednesday the EU announced details of its new €373 billion budget for its “Cohesion Policy”.
Brexit Facts4EU.Org started covering this yesterday, giving an introduction to just one part of this enormous area of EU funding – the ‘European Youth Area’ and the Erasmus+ programme for young people.
The British media accorded the announcement of the new Cohesion Policy barely a mention. The only articles we found were in the Daily Remainer (the FT) and the Daily Leaver (the Daily Express).
On Wednesday Brussels released large numbers of documents containing hundreds of pages. Admittedly there was a lot of content to wade through. Nevertheless, we managed to do this and we’re a very small team in media terms.
Regrettably the national broadcaster, the BBC, was unable to find the the resources to report on the matter at all.
One important aspect of the EU’s funds for ‘cohesion’ is that the UK has always been excluded from being a recipient of any money at all from them. Tens of billions have been spent improving the intrastructure of large parts of the EU, paid for mostly by the UK and Germany.
While there have been no funds for mending dangerous potholes in roads in the UK, the British taxpayer has been funding the construction of multi-lane motorways, rail systems, and waterways across swathes of the continent. Regular readers will remember our many articles about this which have appeared over the last few years.
  • The EU proposes to spend €373 billion on ‘cohesion’ in its next budget
  • The UK will pay for part of this under Theresa May’s current plans
  • You, the British public, are not being told about this
Now in the old days, €373 billion was considered a lot of money.
On a more serious note one might have thought that the UK’s media organisations would have shown at least some interest.
It is true that the UK is supposed to be leaving the EU next March, before the new budget starts. However it is currently the intention of Theresa May’s government to continue in the EU in all but name until 01 Jan 2021 and there have been persistent rumours that she is even planning to extend this period.
Additionally, Mrs May has said she wishes to remain inside several EU programmes following Brexit. This means that the UK will continue paying large sums towards at least some of the items contained in the new budget for the Cohesion Policy. The example we gave yesterday was the Erasmus+ programme which – aside from its deeply worrying social engineering agenda – is set to double in cost in the new budget to €30 billion.
There is another important to raise. Whilst the matter at hand relates to the next budget for the Cohesion Policy, the UK continues to pay for the existing one, and will do for many years yet, thanks to Mrs May's capitulation on the exit bill. Any discussion of the new budget serves to reveal to the British people just where all of their money has been going for the last 45 years - and where it will continue to go after we 'leave'. With Brexit continually under attack, we need to continue getting the message out.
We mention this subject because it is indicative of the way in which the EU has been covered by the media since the UK joined in 1973. When the Referendum was finally granted it is hardly surprising that the vast majority of the population – including its MPs – were unaware of most of what the EU actually did.
The ghastly goings-on in the EU Parliament were never reported, unless they involved a UKIP MEP (usually Mr Farage) being berated by the Chair or by the Chamber, or both.
The details of the EU’s budget were almost never reported upon and its insane policies almost never discussed in print or on the screen. The best we eurosceptics could hope for was a piece appearing about an EU directive on the curvature of bananas.
Note to those who inhabit the Westminster bubble: Before you complain that we are exaggerating and that there have been lots of articles about the EU each year, we would remind you that the vast majority of the public prefer not to read 3,000 word essays. There simply hasn't been 'normal coverage' which registers with ordinary people leading busy lives.
The press are commercial animals. To a large extent they must print what the public wants to read. However the BBC has a remit to inform. Not only did it fail to fulfil the minimum requirements of news reporting when it came to the EU over the last 45 years, but it is still failing today when Brexit is the single most important political and economic topic in a generation.
The BBC mentions Brexit daily, but it generally only reports on what key personalities say, and it hones in on anti-Brexit stories. We still say that the public has little idea what the EU does or how it spends British taxpayers' money.
Yesterday we published an introduction to just part of this budget, which the UK will pay for under the current plans of the May government. We described the ‘European Youth Area’ and showed that the budget for the Erasmus+ youth programme which includes the indoctrination of young people has been doubled to €30 billion out of the €373 billion.
Regrettably readers did not seem particularly interested, judging from our mailbag and the response on social media.
We must therefore assume there is little interest in the remaining €343 billion. We can only hope for a change of Prime Minister, and a new leader who will stop the nonsense of continuing to pay into wasteful funds like these which barely benefit the UK at all.
[ Sources: EU Commission ]        04.50am, 01 June 2018
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: Martin, Shropshire      Date/Time: 01 June 2018, 8.27pm
Message: 'Regrettably readers did not seem particularly interested, judging from our mailbag...'
Please keep fighting, you are doing a wonderful job. Your revelation today will weaken this deeply rotten government, which I believe will eventually destroy itself with its own lies.
Name: Patrick H, London      Date/Time: 01 June 2018, 11.31am
Message: Are the British induced masochists? One always wonders why the citizens of the UK continue to vote for these self-seeking political parties that have more interest in Europe than their own country. We are a country of moaners and pessimists and perhaps ever so slightly Nihilistic "oh dear that is terrible, but hey ho, let's have another cuppa and forget about it". Housing, Healthcare, Education, Road infrastructure, Pensions, Aged aftercare, Policing, etc. are a disaster and most probably the worst in Europe (for those that travel to Europe on a regular basis and see it first hand?). Brits have been at the back of the queue for decades in the EU and our politicians acquiesce on all issues driven from Brussels; unlike the French that really give it to their politicians when they are unhappy....why is this? My personal view is our Establishment's historical social engineering! The Brits are conditioned to accept mediocrity. Just go to the main cities in France, Switzerland, Austria, Scandinavia, Spain, Holland, Poland and especially Germany where everything is being renewed at pace? See the condition of their motorways, streets in general, housing, their hospitals/healthcare, inner cities (a remarkable transition), subsidised transport systems, real social amenities, subsidised education, reasonably priced supermarkets and then come back and look at ours...we are being mugged. The construction of our houses in the UK is appalling...low quality, smaller and smaller (Coronation street housing is making a comeback), but prices continue to increase - almost impossible for youngsters to leave home unless it is into some overpriced grotty bedsit. Take a good look at Britain and realise how we have been shafted by our own establishment/elites and left behind by Europe (thanks for your money UK, Europe appreciates it). We watch the rich grow richer and we swoon over the monarchy and celebs while our aged pensioners try to exist on smaller and smaller pensions...I won't go on as this would become a "War and Peace" of the ills of our society, seemingly from a raving neo-communist! As I said, induced masochistic tendencies due to our elite's social engineering are at the heart of our social demise. Your latest article reinforces this issue... our complete lack of knowledge of the EU's inner workings and our Government's shocking ineptitude on all matters pertaining to managing our country?...but, hey ho, fancy another cuppa anyone?
Name: R Ellison, Essex, UK      Date/Time: 01 June 2018, 10.58am
Message: This 373 Billion Euros budget should be making headline news in ALL our national media. Wake up Editors. Your readers must be kept informed. Fail in your role, and lose your readers. I, amongst many, am disgusted, flabbergasted and FURIOUS that our Prime Minister, whose responsibility should be to the British public, should so easily misappropriate our hard-earned taxes. What is even worse, she does it in full knowledge it'll be frittered away on projects in other EU countries, all decided upon by a profligate, unelected, EU band of brothers. The British people will not benefit in any shape or form, as has happened over the last FORTY YEARS.
Time for Theresa May to resign, or be removed, forthwith. It is now clear that the end game of Theresa May, and her husband, is to keep Britain within the EU Membership. THAT IS TRAITOROUS, given the Referendum result. They and a obsequious Government will kill off the Conservative Party for decades to come. May was given the mandate to get us out of the EU, had ample time to do so, and intentionally fudged it. Unless her fellow Tories wish their Party to be totally, totally decimated, then act they must, and quickly. Stop her now and turn round your damaged reputation. Remember, get us out and the British people will show loyalty to you, the Conservative Party, with eternal gratitude. He Who Pays the Piper, Plays the Tune.

One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £2
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
© EU Commission
“in our draft withdrawal agreement, most of the provisions logically come from the law of the European Union or are inspired by it.”
Blame the EU for negative effects of Brexit?
“We will not be impressed. I will not be impressed.”
On Saturday the EU’s Chief Brexit Negotiator Michel Barnier spoke to the Federation of EU lawyers in Lisbon.
In his speech he dictated what the EU will not accept as far as the legal framework of Brexit is concerned.
He also took the opportunity to patronise and criticise the UK, which has increasingly become the default setting for unelected EU officials when speaking of the United Kingdom.
Below we publish the key excerpts from what Monsieur Barnier said. As always when he is saying something that he hopes will not be fully reported by the British press, he spoke in French. This is despite the fact that the common language of the vast majority of lawyers present was English.
And as usual the EU did not bother to translate his speech, publishing it only in French on the EU Commission’s website on Sunday when we wrote this article.
We invite you to read the short extracts we publish below and then to consider our observations in the box below.
Lisbon, 26 May 2018
“For eight years, the British courts will be able to refer preliminary questions to the Luxembourg Court of Justice. They will also have to take into account, for the purposes of the withdrawal agreement, the relevant case law of the Court”
“According to the British position, any disagreement between the EU and the UK over the interpretation or application of the withdrawal agreement should be decided by this joint committee.
“In my view, this would be tantamount to replacing the jurisdictional review of the rules of law with a simple political settlement, which is unacceptable.”
“By creating or joining the European Union, member states have agreed to pool certain aspects of their sovereignty to create a body of law applicable to themselves and their nationals”
“in our draft withdrawal agreement, most of the provisions logically come from the law of the European Union or are inspired by it.”
“For these provisions or for the concepts of the withdrawal agreement that come from EU law, we can not accept that another jurisdiction than the Court of Justice of the European Union says what the law is and that it imposes its interpretation on the institutions of the Union.”
“the British judges will have, during a transitional period, in fact quite a long time, the power to ask questions for a preliminary ruling of the Court of Justice of the EU. They will have this power for any dispute brought, in first instance before a British judge, in the first eight years of application of these provisions from the end of the transition.”
“if we want British withdrawal to proceed in good conditions, the United Kingdom must of course respect what the European Union is.”
“without agreement on governance, and without an agreement on Ireland and Northern Ireland, there will be no withdrawal agreement, and therefore no transition period.”
“I can see the temptation of the blame game to pin the negative consequences of Brexit on the European Union. But we will not be impressed. I will not be impressed.”
“Nowhere else in the world is there a common legal order for a whole continent like the one we have been building together for 60 years.”
We invite you to consider whether any of the above remotely resembles the Prime Minister’s promises of taking back control of the law of the land and not submitting to the authority of a foreign court.
In short, Barnier is reiterating the insistence of the EU that everything will be subject to EU law. Politicians like Mrs May will try to find a form of words to pretend that this isn’t so, but they can only fudge this for so long. In the end the law must be precise – or as precise as it can be made to look whilst still allowing each side to claim victory.
The reality is simple. The EU will never negotiate a deal remotely acceptable to the majority of the British public.
We stated this right from the start and we maintain our position. There was a small chance of achieving some agreements that would have been acceptable, had the British government taken a strong stand from the start.
This they failed to do. Any cursory look at what the Prime Minister has provisionally agreed shows that the UK has capitualted on every single point of contention. The attitude was wrong from the beginning and the results now are hardly surprising.
To an extent, yes. With a new and robust leadership the British government could reclaim some ground, but the damage has mostly been done. The EU has been allowed to believe that its introspective version of reality is in some way normal. It will be tough to turn this around.
If the Referendum result is in any way to be respected the only realistic outcome is “no deal”. But that is not what Mrs May is planning. She clearly believes that she can bamboozle, procrastinate and fudge her way through to some complete mess of a deal which she can try to pretend bears a resemblance to Brexit.
It will be nothing of the kind.
We understand the needs of the Conservative pro-Brexit Members of Parliament who read this site to be loyal to the Prime Minister for as long as possible. However that moment has now well and truly passed.
It remains our view that all pro-Brexit groups including Brexit Facts4EU.Org should coalesce under a single banner to ensure that a clear voice is heard. This voice could be a rallying cry around which both MPs and the public could combine.
In the last three years we have made attempts to suggest such an alignment – in various forms – but have received either lukewarm support or no support at all. We’ve virtually given up emailing any Brexit organisation now. We’re small (albeit perhaps disproportionately effective) and we shouldn’t be the ones trying to do this. We barely have the resources to keep going, despite being a very well-used source for real information.
It is notable that when we have secured cooperation – for example in the last couple of months from Fishing for Leave and the Freedom Association – readers have been universally delighted. The people want us to get together to defeat the very well-funded, anti-democratic and anti-Brexit forces lined up in unity against us. Unfortunately it seems that the silo mentality is the norm, and perhaps egos are getting in the way.
Monsieur Barnier’s speech on Saturday was in fact fairly typical of what we see each day coming our of the EU. Possibly it contained some less diplomatic language than usual but the words used by Barnier can only lead to one outcome.
It’s about time politicians and certain supposedly pro-Brexit organisations started admitting this. Then we can all move quickly to prepare for the true exit of the United Kingdom from the messy and failing morass of the European Union.
[ Sources: EU Commission ]        06.10am, 01 June 2018
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: Patrick H, London      Date/Time: 01 June 2018, 1.32pm
Message: Let's cut to the chase...ignore all the background noise and force inept T. May to accept the will of the people and move straight to WTO...the rest will sort itself out and then if the EU again gets stupid, simply lay down our law!
Name: Jon, Wales      Date/Time: 01 June 2018, 10.04am
Message: Mr Barnier's speech is wholly unacceptable. This man is a bureaucrat trying to be someone he isn't. Let Mr Barnier be in no doubts, he may well be intimidating Prime Minister May and official UK negotiators, but he forgets Brexiteers will not stand for his pathetic attempt to dictate to the people of our GREAT country. Mr Barnier wishes to be awkward in every conceivable way.
ALL BREXITEERS MUST MAKE THEIR VOICES HEARD This saga has gone on far too long. UK Member's of Parliament need to stand up for our country and STOP Mrs May giving away bit by bit (I don't recall being asked to fund their 'EU army' for example).
If this now means Mrs May is removed from power on a vote of NO CONFIDENCE, then so be it, her time is well and truly ended.
We've put up with almost daily threats from the Commission and anger is building to boiling point more than ever before, and the EU still do not understand. I have not heard Mrs May telling them to cease their threats. It is time to rip up all negotiations thus far and walk away to MAKE A CLEAN BREAK. We already have countries queuing up to make deals with the UK, and should get on and sign them for the benefit of our country moving forward, whilst wholly ignoring the Commission. This is why the EU are so fearful of the UK. They hate the fact we're leaving so attempt to make an example of us to prevent other EU members exiting? Who on earth would want friends with those who threaten - NOT ME, at least no longer. The EU commission have been less than professional by meeting every person under the sun to discuss UK departure - we're leaving, simple as that (we're not leaving the continent). The Commission have past anything that vaguely resembles common-sense, and their diplomatic skills leave much to be desired. The EU will be our competitors, and at present the UK are paying billions because Mrs May has capitulated so often. We will be a rule taker and be subject to foreign jurisdiction, and so on - I SUGGEST WE STOP FUNDING THE EU WITH IMMEDIATE EFFECT.
Name: Not4EU, London      Date/Time: 01 June 2018, 10.04am
Message: “By creating or joining the European Union, member states have agreed to pool certain aspects of their sovereignty to create a body of law applicable to themselves and their nationals”
Yes, but Monsieur Barnier we are LEAVING so this is no longer applicable.
Name: Brexiteer, Braintree, Essex      Date/Time: 01 June 2018, 09.34am
Message: One can only assume that Barnier knows something we the British public don't know about these withdrawal negotiations. That the monies, promised by May are in the bag, and will be paid regardless. No one in negotiations where billions of pounds are at stake, would be so reckless in their insults to the other side you are negotiating with. The British legal system dates back to Magna Carta in 1215, a lot longer than the 60 years the EU system has cobbled together. Still not much longer roll on March 29 2019.
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.

One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £2
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
(Anonymity respected completely if you prefer to remain private)
       Best regards, the Facts4EU.Org Team, 2018
To read all our output from May 2018, 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. 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: 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 © 2018 except where owned by others.
Press and Leave campaigns please contact us for re-use of information.