I'm curious, if the Norway style - would that negate the need for the £40 billion (TBC) exit bill? Would it just turn into new rolling contributions?
Suppose that could be worded as a success if the government so desired... 'we managed to get the bill reduced to zero!'
It's not an exit bill - it's us agreeing to pay what we'd already committed to, whilst members of the EU. So there was never a way of avoiding paying it - other than walking out on our debts, which would have ruined our ability to raise capital so would have ultimately been unthinkable.
So no - we'll continue to pay, we just lose any influence over the laws and institutions we're paying for.
Indeed, agreed - I probably was a bit lazy with my words there - or at least put 'exit bill' into quotation marks, as I had my pretending-to-be-the-government hat on :)
It's not an exit bill - it's us agreeing to pay what we'd already committed to, whilst members of the EU. So there was never a way of avoiding paying it - other than walking out on our debts, which would have ruined our ability to raise capital so would have ultimately been unthinkable.
So no - we'll continue to pay, we just lose any influence over the laws and institutions we're paying for.