Former Treasury official slaps down Liam Fox over Brexit ‘blackmail’ claim
Liam Fox delivering his speech in Japan. He should stay there, but I don’t suppose they’ll have him.
"Blackmail" is the perpetual cry of the smaller negotiator with the weaker hand. #getagrip
— Nick Macpherson (@nickmacpherson2) September 1, 2017
That’s you told, Liam Fox!
For those who don’t know, Nick Macpherson is a former head of the Treasury and therefore might just know what he’s on about.
Unlike Liam Fox.
Notice Dr Fox’s comment at the end of the extract below, in which he says discussions on the trade-focused part of Brexit should start at once. He knows the EU won’t be having any truck with that until after the first part is done.
His speech was a pathetic piece of sabre-rattling from a pipsqueak of a politician.
The international trade secretary, Liam Fox, has ratcheted up the government’s war of words with the EU over Brexit by saying Britain will not be “blackmailed” into paying an excessive exit settlement to speed up a deal.
Fox’s comment follows a tense press conference in Brussels on Thursday after the third round of exit talks, in which the EU’s chief negotiator, Michel Barnier, accused the UK of being mired in “nostalgia” rather than taking a realistic approach.
Fox was asked by ITV news whether it was time for Britain to agree on the much-disputed departure settlement with the EU, hastening progress towards the second, trade-focused part of the process.
“We can’t be blackmailed into paying a price on the first part,” Fox said.
He continued: “We think we should begin discussions on the final settlement because that’s good for business, and it’s good for the prosperity both of the British people and of the rest of the people of the European Union.”
Source: Liam Fox accuses EU of trying to ‘blackmail’ UK over Brexit deal | Politics | The Guardian
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical
3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/
Join the Vox Political Facebook page.
4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:
Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.
The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:
Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:
The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:
I think that we would all be better served, except his patients, if he stuck to his quackery.
Sounds like the intro to Dad’s Army.
“Who do you think you are kidding Mr Juncker now you think we’re in the run….”
Brexiteers still wearing their rose coloured spectacles of course.
Well there is a reason that Mc Person is a former employee, and Fox used the term in its correct terminology because it is clear that despite there being no provision for it in article 50 the eu, namely Bernier to demand a huge un accountable sum of money to enter talks is frankly illegal and downright blackmail.
It’s not, though – it’s the money the UK is contractually obliged to provide.
Suggest that you familiarise yourself with the financial obligations that Cameron’s government made with the EU. This is nothing to do with “blackmail”, this is about legal financial obligations.
Given the fact that during the Parliamentary expenses scandal Fox repeatedly claimed he did not understand and/or he misunderstood reasonably straightforward rules, he must be well out of his depth at the moment, …unless of course he wasn’t telling the truth during the expenses scandal. I won’t even start on the Official Secrets Act/Misconduct in a Public Office regarding his antics with Werritty and a US government official. As “chriskitcher” has already said on this thread – he should stick to quackery, ..but then perhaps he wasn’t very honest or very good at that either, which is why he decided to be a very unpleasant right-wing politician.