Britain says it cannot be blackmailed by EU over exit bill

True - it cannot be "blackmailed." It can - and will - however, be forced to reckon with the legal consequences of their decision. That's not "blackmail," that's law.

The British government has been keen to shift talks to a new relationship, 

Haha is that a joke? They haven't left yet nor paid their bills but are already worming their way back into good ol' EU presumably cause it wasnt that bad after all! Sneaky.

Make Nigel Farage PM, he'll sort them out!

I take it that is a joke. Farage did not even have the courage to go and lead his own party UKIP. Farage merely revels in stirring things up by playing the anti-immigration/ refugee/ terrorism card. Even when they voted for Brexit did he take a lead? No, he bottled it when the consequences dawned on him. Farage continued to draw his Euro MP salary from Brussels, all the while slamming the European parliament.

It's common sense, rational, that: You, me, them over there, him in here, cannot be outside an organisation and shape its legal order. The organisation, its capacity to regulate, to supervise and to enforce said organisation's laws, will not, can not, be undermined by someone who has demanded to leave!

Britain wants it to be my way AND the highway, but they forgot it's "or". It's not "blackmail" to pay a fee for when that fee is spelled out in the law. On the contrary, Britain is demanding concessions and saying "or else".

Hey Britain, if you violate a contract you willfully signed, then you have to pay. Labeling it as "black mail" is only for the naive brexiteers ( more akin to Trump supporters in the US) to believe in, but makes you look quite petty to the rest of the world.

Wrong UK has agreed to leave which require certain monies to leave yet the UK is not willing to pay those dues.

Further more there are other agreements to be worked up like in any other divorce those are not favourable to the one that initiated leaving from a group. Why should it be? Fair to the rest of the group?

Ignoring the greater benefit and needs of the actual people of the EU. how is allowing the UK to pay the minimum amount possible, granting them free market access and removing all the dislikes the UK has with the EU going to benefit EU member states. The EU will make being in the EU more advantageous than not and rightly so, why would any other member want to stay if the UK get a more favorable agreement than they have now! UK rely far more on the EU to sell its exports than vise versa.

It's all Bureaucratic nonsense, and the UK's Politicians are not being forthright by being Blunt, instead they are pussy footing around making fools of themselves. T. May (or may not as maybe the case), needs to do something lest the UK spiral into a chasm of despair leading to the breakup of the UK. She, and her cohorts lack real strength of character to deal with the situation in front of them, and indeed... that can be said to be true of the reason that led to this situation in the first place. Bunch of Idiots.

The phased approach adopted by the EU council of ministers that approved a set uncompromisingly ridged directives/ guidelines for EU for chief negotiator, Michel Barnier. 'Priorities' accepted by all 27 member state governments indicating clearly how the negotiations should progress on Britain’s withdrawal .

There is a major drawback to this approach .

Mark Bowman Director General, International Finance at the British Treasury and his legal team seated opposite EU Stéphanie Riso,  Director for strategy, coordination and communications, plus Stéphanie team of analysts and negotiators,  presented close to four hours worth, with the aid of a number of PowerPoint presentations a line by line legal rebuttal of any liability outlined in the EU methodology for calculating the UKs financial obligations.

Without setting or agreeing a principal to determined obligations, negotiating liabilities is not possibly feasible totally unworkable.      

At the Report of Session 2016–17 Brexit and the EU budget Lords select committee Dr. Maria-Luisa Sánchez-Barrueco is Senior Lecturer in EU Law and Politics presented two scenarios, agreement or nothing.

“When I say nothing, I mean it. If the Treaties collapse for the UK, the whole legal building—all the legal documents hanging from the Treaties—will collapse. That includes the MFF, the annual budget, the programmes and the individual funding decisions for beneficiaries.”.........

Also Sánchez-Barrueco  argued.....

There was no legal basis on which to extend the binding force of the Treaties or the legal acts based on them if the parties did not reach explicit agreement on it. Article 50, she argued, was the prevailing provision in the EU Treaties, and took precedence over other provisions that, for instance, gave force to the MFF or established the competence of the CJEU. Article 50 was the lex specialis applicable to withdrawal.

Both parties need to return to the negotiating table drop the phased approach and calmly put everything on the table. Stop the finger pointing blame game and move on.

@Todd, hogwash, nonsense and noise, stop imitating the UK Tory rabble.

Don't think the bloke understands basic English.

"Blackmail" is when you know someone's done something illegal, or at least reprehensible, and you threaten to expose them if they don't pay hush money.

How is that relevant to this case?

Negative comments again... The UK should stop providing Financial Aid to foreign countries if it's going to prevent it's Nationals from Marrying a Foreign Partner and allowing the two to be together.. Double-standards.

It is quite silly for the EU (just the negotiating team by the looks of it) to keep demanding payment for a divorce bill and while refusing to show a breakdown of the calculations. It really makes it look like they're picking random figures out of the air at this point.

I don't think anyone in their right minds would pay a large sum without seeing how they've come to that figure.

Make Nigel Farage PM, he'll sort them out!

The UK is no longer what it used to be, it's been infiltrated by peoples from India, and Pakistan, and others from wildly non-Western Cultures, who have built up their own communities and brought with them their own ways and customs, refusing to integrate, and even accept the British Law, some now wish to impose Sharia upon the rest of the UK... nice ? not!.

So now it's even come to this:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-41012762

The new Law arose, because Indian immigrants abused the European immigration system so much, that the UK took a knee jerk reaction that now splits legitimate families. No wonder Brexit came to a head and people voted to leave! This is where it all stemmed from.

I would not be surprised to see a real radical Nationalistic state arising within the UK, if not it's breakup, and potential Civil War. The UK really does appear to be in a mess now.

Look, its very simple. Britain has voted to leave the EU. Why should it pay for things in the future, that it will not be entitled to.

EU needs to be flexible. Imagine, Britain being sunk into the sea... money gone right... ? OK, so now deal with it.

The EU parasites still dont get why Brexit happened. They are parasites proven by the fact that money and paying off the overlord is a central issue to the brussels leeches. Britian could just as easily demand money for what was lost due to the incompetence of Brussels.

In the end the UK will fare well, getting back to real trade without an extra unnecessary bureaucracy in the way. The EU, will slowly crumble under the weight of its own incompetence and greed. The bottom line is europe did not need an overlord government of freeloading politicians and the sooner it is shut down the better it will be for everyone.

Hopefully other countries in Europe will notice how toxic the EU is and also decide to leave.

We are trying to move forward and create a mutualy beneficial working relationship post Brexit, the EU Bureaucrats only see the threat to their comfy gravey train and their dictatorial power set up so are focused on "punishing" anyone who dares disagree with them. Ignoring the greater benefit and needs of the actual people of the EU.