This dirty conduct of the Remain campaign stinks of panic. Out of arguments already, with three months to go until the referendum and new evidence of the damage the EU does to Britain pouring in every day, a bad case is now being made even worse by incompetence and dishonesty...
The EU cheerleaders are starting to panic
If the case to stay in is so compelling, why do Cameron and friends find it impossible to make it?
By Simon Heffer
12 Mar 2016
The Telegraph
If it weren’t bad enough for David Cameron that he is making such a pig’s ear of the campaign to stay in the European Union, his so-called friends on the continent are providing ever more reasons for us to vote to leave. Blackmailed by the repressive regime in Turkey, Angela Merkel, Europe’s paymaster, set about last week setting up visa-free travel to the EU for the 75 million people living there. And, because we have no sovereignty over immigration from the EU, if Frau Merkel is saying 75 million Turks can walk into Europe, then they can walk into Britain.
As I have repeatedly noted, Mr Cameron had no “renegotiation” of our relationship with our partners. If we vote to stay in on June 23, things stay as they are – or, quite possibly, become worse, because we shall be completely at the mercy of further decisions taken not by the other 27 countries, but by one woman in her Chancellery in Berlin.
The main cause of the British people’s agitation with the EU was that we could not stop people from it entering our country. Mr Cameron did not fail to win that concession: he didn’t even ask for it.
So he began with a pretty weak argument for staying in – because nothing had happened to address popular fears – and matters have got steadily worse. The predictable scaremongering has become comical, as have Downing Street’s efforts to bully and cajole people of influence into begging us to vote to remain. Last week 150 scientists, including Stephen Hawking, said scientific research would suffer if we left. According to them, a net £2.4 billion in research funds has come from the EU in the last seven years.
Cambridge physicist Stephen Hawking has said that UK scientific research would suffer if we left the EU
The idea of the scientific establishment having to hold out a begging bowl to Brussels or face oblivion is pernicious and dishonest, and these people should be clever enough to see that. In 2015 the UK contributed £13 billion to the EU budget, and received £4.5 billion in return. Since many of these scientists are accomplished mathematicians, they hardly need me to tell them how much more they might get from the Government if we were not making a net contribution of £8.5 billion a year to Brussels.
On Friday, Mr Cameron sought to scare farmers by saying they would lose £330 million a year in beef and lamb exports if we left. How does he know? Is there a special department in the Government making all this claptrap up? How do they know? Has it occurred to him that in the highly unlikely event of tariffs being imposed on British exports to Europe, our farmers might just find other markets for their meat? Or that, once we ran our own agriculture policy again, the business of farming might become much easier and cheaper?
Trade tariffs are unlikely because of Europe’s heavy dependence on us as a marketplace. The latest figures were announced on Friday and showed a record trade deficit with the EU: £8.1 billion in January alone, and £23 billion in the last three months. How, in the light of such figures, can any minister say that we benefit from trade by being in the EU? It is an enormous lie.
No wonder the Business Secretary, Sajid Javid, who knows a thing or two about commerce having had a distinguished career in the City, is said to be enduring agonies over his decision to support Mr Cameron’s increasingly absurd position. Any sensible and decent person would.
Scaremongering and lies, especially this early in a campaign that won’t finish for another three months, are exceptionally counter-productive. The public has time to see through them; they reflect growing desperation, which is never attractive in political leadership; and they suggest an absolute vacuum of argument.
No wonder Tony Blair said on Thursday that the campaign to stay in lacks “muscularity”. Of course it does: even the most cynical opportunist finds it hard to become passionate about the need to stay in a club that is an overpriced cartel, excessively bureaucratic, anti-democratic, corrupt, economically ruinous and is promising more of the same.
I spoke last week to two of London’s most senior and experienced public relations men about the conduct of the “In” campaign: and both agreed that every possible communications mistake Mr Cameron and his side could make was being made.
Some of these have been obvious: think of allowing Lord Rose to go out and “warn” people that their wages might go up if we left the EU, or the outrageous bullying that led to the removal of John Longworth from the British Chambers of Commerce.
It is time Downing Street stopped lying about how it threatens others about what might happen unless they crush dissent; but it is at least consistent with the dictatorial nature of the club to which they wish us to remain a member, which reminds me more and more of the old Soviet Union.
The rule book is, indeed, being torn up. Last Wednesday, Bernard Jenkin, chairman of the Commons Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee, wrote to Mr Cameron to ask why one of his advisers, Daniel Korski, had issued a stream of anti-Brexit Twitter messages, including a personal attack on Iain Duncan Smith, in breach of the code of conduct for special advisers. With his usual arrogance, Mr Cameron brushed this aside: Mr Korski, who used to work for the Labour Party, may now be called before Mr Jenkin’s committee to explain himself.
This dirty conduct stinks of panic. Out of arguments already, with three months to go and new evidence of the damage the EU does to Britain pouring in every day, a bad case is now being made even worse by incompetence and dishonesty.
If you are still making up your mind about how to vote, ask yourself this: if the case to stay in is so incredibly compelling, why do Mr Cameron and his friends seem to find it impossible to make it?
The EU cheerleaders are starting to panic - Telegraph
The EU cheerleaders are starting to panic
If the case to stay in is so compelling, why do Cameron and friends find it impossible to make it?
By Simon Heffer
12 Mar 2016
The Telegraph
If it weren’t bad enough for David Cameron that he is making such a pig’s ear of the campaign to stay in the European Union, his so-called friends on the continent are providing ever more reasons for us to vote to leave. Blackmailed by the repressive regime in Turkey, Angela Merkel, Europe’s paymaster, set about last week setting up visa-free travel to the EU for the 75 million people living there. And, because we have no sovereignty over immigration from the EU, if Frau Merkel is saying 75 million Turks can walk into Europe, then they can walk into Britain.
As I have repeatedly noted, Mr Cameron had no “renegotiation” of our relationship with our partners. If we vote to stay in on June 23, things stay as they are – or, quite possibly, become worse, because we shall be completely at the mercy of further decisions taken not by the other 27 countries, but by one woman in her Chancellery in Berlin.
The main cause of the British people’s agitation with the EU was that we could not stop people from it entering our country. Mr Cameron did not fail to win that concession: he didn’t even ask for it.
So he began with a pretty weak argument for staying in – because nothing had happened to address popular fears – and matters have got steadily worse. The predictable scaremongering has become comical, as have Downing Street’s efforts to bully and cajole people of influence into begging us to vote to remain. Last week 150 scientists, including Stephen Hawking, said scientific research would suffer if we left. According to them, a net £2.4 billion in research funds has come from the EU in the last seven years.
Cambridge physicist Stephen Hawking has said that UK scientific research would suffer if we left the EU
The idea of the scientific establishment having to hold out a begging bowl to Brussels or face oblivion is pernicious and dishonest, and these people should be clever enough to see that. In 2015 the UK contributed £13 billion to the EU budget, and received £4.5 billion in return. Since many of these scientists are accomplished mathematicians, they hardly need me to tell them how much more they might get from the Government if we were not making a net contribution of £8.5 billion a year to Brussels.
On Friday, Mr Cameron sought to scare farmers by saying they would lose £330 million a year in beef and lamb exports if we left. How does he know? Is there a special department in the Government making all this claptrap up? How do they know? Has it occurred to him that in the highly unlikely event of tariffs being imposed on British exports to Europe, our farmers might just find other markets for their meat? Or that, once we ran our own agriculture policy again, the business of farming might become much easier and cheaper?
Trade tariffs are unlikely because of Europe’s heavy dependence on us as a marketplace. The latest figures were announced on Friday and showed a record trade deficit with the EU: £8.1 billion in January alone, and £23 billion in the last three months. How, in the light of such figures, can any minister say that we benefit from trade by being in the EU? It is an enormous lie.
No wonder the Business Secretary, Sajid Javid, who knows a thing or two about commerce having had a distinguished career in the City, is said to be enduring agonies over his decision to support Mr Cameron’s increasingly absurd position. Any sensible and decent person would.
Scaremongering and lies, especially this early in a campaign that won’t finish for another three months, are exceptionally counter-productive. The public has time to see through them; they reflect growing desperation, which is never attractive in political leadership; and they suggest an absolute vacuum of argument.
No wonder Tony Blair said on Thursday that the campaign to stay in lacks “muscularity”. Of course it does: even the most cynical opportunist finds it hard to become passionate about the need to stay in a club that is an overpriced cartel, excessively bureaucratic, anti-democratic, corrupt, economically ruinous and is promising more of the same.
I spoke last week to two of London’s most senior and experienced public relations men about the conduct of the “In” campaign: and both agreed that every possible communications mistake Mr Cameron and his side could make was being made.
Some of these have been obvious: think of allowing Lord Rose to go out and “warn” people that their wages might go up if we left the EU, or the outrageous bullying that led to the removal of John Longworth from the British Chambers of Commerce.
It is time Downing Street stopped lying about how it threatens others about what might happen unless they crush dissent; but it is at least consistent with the dictatorial nature of the club to which they wish us to remain a member, which reminds me more and more of the old Soviet Union.
The rule book is, indeed, being torn up. Last Wednesday, Bernard Jenkin, chairman of the Commons Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee, wrote to Mr Cameron to ask why one of his advisers, Daniel Korski, had issued a stream of anti-Brexit Twitter messages, including a personal attack on Iain Duncan Smith, in breach of the code of conduct for special advisers. With his usual arrogance, Mr Cameron brushed this aside: Mr Korski, who used to work for the Labour Party, may now be called before Mr Jenkin’s committee to explain himself.
This dirty conduct stinks of panic. Out of arguments already, with three months to go and new evidence of the damage the EU does to Britain pouring in every day, a bad case is now being made even worse by incompetence and dishonesty.
If you are still making up your mind about how to vote, ask yourself this: if the case to stay in is so incredibly compelling, why do Mr Cameron and his friends seem to find it impossible to make it?
The EU cheerleaders are starting to panic - Telegraph
Last edited:
