Spare us the 3 million jobs lie Danny

 

For the umpteenth time parts of the media cover today’s rehash of the 3 million jobs at risk lie about the EU. Why? If the UK left the EU  there would be a trade deal, as the rest of the EU has always accepted, as they sell us more than we sell them.

3 million jobs to go is not news. It is not even interesting olds. It is simply a lie.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

64 Comments

  1. Narrow Shoulders
    Posted June 25, 2014 at 6:59 am | Permalink

    Could this have come out again today as your leader and party area distracted fighting fires caused by ambition and poor judgement elsewhere? Coulson and Juncker on the same day.

    As Mr Farage has gained credibility of late let us hope his spin machine cranks up to refute the 3 million jobs untruth.

    • Anonymous
      Posted June 25, 2014 at 7:42 pm | Permalink

      The most important thing…

      What does Mr Cameron have to say in public about the 3 million ‘lie’ ?

      • Lifelogic
        Posted June 26, 2014 at 9:52 am | Permalink

        Nothing as usual, his heart and soul is clearly in favour of the lie, that is why we got Lord Patten at the BBC, one assumes. How is his search for a lefty, pro EU, magic money tree economics, greencrap believer, arts grad, woman to replace him at the BBC trust coming on?

  2. Jerry
    Posted June 25, 2014 at 7:12 am | Permalink

    John, it’s the only scare story in town, that is why europhiles and the media use it.

    • Lielogic
      Posted June 25, 2014 at 7:34 am | Permalink

      Exactly, this is just the only line they have – other than the 50% of our exports lie/exaggeration. Has Cameron come up with a single rational reason not to be a Greater Switzerland/Norway on Sea yet or is it just a gut feeling? Best not to think using the gut I find.

      The only real reason is that they will gang up on us if we leave, but they do that far more effectively now using the EU mechanisms, regulations & treaties and other “legal” means.

      I assume if Scotland leave the UK then the bogus 50% will jump perhaps to say 55%? Will Cameron go if he breaks up the Union that has served both countries so well?

      • Lifelogic
        Posted June 25, 2014 at 7:35 am | Permalink

        Lifelogic not Lielogic!

        • Bazman
          Posted June 26, 2014 at 5:41 pm | Permalink

          Devil works in strange ways…

      • Max Dunbar
        Posted June 25, 2014 at 9:53 am | Permalink

        Yes Cameron must go if the Union breaks up.
        One could argue that it’s not so much a break-up of a ‘union’ so much as a ceding of the northern territory of Britain to insurgent Marxists. The so-called Union has been in place for so long that there are really no discernible differences between the people apart from minor ones such as accent and some archaic law practises. The entire nation top to bottom is one country and has operated as such for centuries.
        For a leader, especially a Conservative one, to even contemplate this break-up is shameful and humiliating.

        • Lifelogic
          Posted June 25, 2014 at 5:15 pm | Permalink

          I agree, let us hope sense prevails north of the border.

        • cunctator
          Posted June 30, 2014 at 12:57 pm | Permalink

          The totally false dichotomy into two different countries defies all logic. This is one country the UK. Salmond will ruin Scotland if it goes independent. England, Wales and Northern Ireland will also suffer and time and effort wasted during any period of adjustment will be rued.
          Disaster brought about by stupidity is just as much as a disaster brought about by intent; although in the case of Salmond. I find it hard to decide which is the cause, stupidity or intent.. If there were any justification for ad hominem arguments this is the prime example.

    • Timaction
      Posted June 25, 2014 at 8:20 am | Permalink

      Its time the legacy parties moved out of the way from pretending to rule and let a true democratic, patriotic party room to take over. We want our country, democracy and sovereignty back. We’re fed up to the back teeth of their lies, spin and deceit. Cameron also spins this job lie!

      • Jerry
        Posted June 25, 2014 at 10:16 am | Permalink

        @Timaction: “Its time the legacy parties moved out of the way from pretending to rule and let a true democratic, patriotic party room to take over. We want our country, democracy and sovereignty back. “

        Anyone else see the irony in that comment?!

        Timaction, you want democracy yet you want other parties to move out of the way of allowing your party to achieve your idea of “a true democratic, patriotic party” – a line that could have been written by the hard left, never mind the europhobic right, but no doubt had it been written by the hard left you would be calling it undemocratic. How about just allowing the electors to decide, if they share your politics and views then no doubt your chosen party will be victorious…

        Democracy, sorry Timaction, I don’t believe you know the words definition.

        • Max Dunbar
          Posted June 25, 2014 at 2:01 pm | Permalink

          As Peter van Leeuwen said in an earlier post, there is a discrepancy between General and Euro election results due in large part to the very different way that votes are allocated under the two systems. In that respect, UKIPers do have a reasonable point when they ask that the other parties ‘move out of the way.’ Van Leeuwen favours the Dutch system which would give UKIP and some smaller parties representation in parliament.

          • Jerry
            Posted June 25, 2014 at 5:23 pm | Permalink

            @Max Dunbar: So what you are basically saying is, the traditional (FPTP) UK method of elections needs to give way for the traditional (PR) European method of elections so that a anti EU party [1] can obtain electoral legitimacy – sorry but that is even more irrational and absurd, especially so if anyone ties to dress it up as being “patriotic”!

            [1] if not outright European, judging by some members apparent xenophobic opinions, as expressed on the hoof, in blogs and on socail media

        • Timaction
          Posted June 26, 2014 at 4:57 pm | Permalink

          Jerry,
          With over 70% of our laws being made by the Commission, rubber stamped by the Euro Parliament (who don’t make the law) and then implemented by Westminster. Don’t you recognise the democratic deficit or are you paid by the EU to write this stuff?
          The Legacy Parties gave away our sovereignty and democracy by incremental Treaty changes, hidden from the public being told the that the Lisbon Treaty was a “tidying up exercise” or Heath promising the British public that it was all about trade and there would be no loss of sovereignty. Go read FCO 30/1048 of 1971 and then get back to me.

          • Jerry
            Posted June 26, 2014 at 6:05 pm | Permalink

            Timeaction: “Don’t you recognise the democratic deficit or are you paid by the EU to write this stuff?”

            Of course I do BUT I also see the danger in someone telling one party to “get out of the way” of others, after all wasn’t there a leader in Germany elected like that between the two wars – yes the EU is bad but having jumped into a pan that is warming up I want to jump clear of both the hot pan and fire thanks!

            I know what the EU will lead to, I do not know what this road you want people to make way for will lead, see my footnote to Max for why…

  3. A.Sedgwick
    Posted June 25, 2014 at 7:15 am | Permalink

    This purports to come from a Treasury study. What is going on? Who is in charge Alexander or Osborne? An A level Economics student could rubbish this “risk”. It is pure Libdem propaganda – another fine mess Cameron has got himself into.

    • Hope
      Posted June 25, 2014 at 7:34 am | Permalink

      Moreover who is paying for it? Why has Cameron let £18 million of taxpayers’ money be used for closer to the EU when when he makes claims in stark contrast.

      • Lifelogic
        Posted June 25, 2014 at 8:03 pm | Permalink

        Well that it seems is the Cameron approach, say one thing, then do the complete opposite. Finding bogus fig leafs such as “A treaty is not a treaty once ratified” as needed.

        He is the sort who can only be judged on his actions these are all, heart and soul for more EU and the end of any residual democracy.

    • a-tracy
      Posted June 25, 2014 at 8:33 am | Permalink

      Why is Danny – Cameron’s mess, its George Osborne’s its his department, get him to answer this and put his junior in his place once and for all. Get the figures out, how much support we pay in each year, just how much business do we get out compared with the other top five inputting nations?
      Where are these 3 million jobs that Danny boy talks about, he wasnt saying this before the European elections was he or his party would have been completely blown away and why wasn’t he if he’s so secure in his statement.
      Junker only looks good on Cameron for standing up for the UKs interests, however, it does remind us just how isolated and ganged up on we are, another reason to remind the people of the UK we just need to get out!! I hate bullying in any form and Junker is being a bully and threatening to exclude him and his sarcky comment about ‘being fair’ to the UK who does he think he’s talking to! some two bit nation who takes out and puts nothing in, get a backbone Cameron and speak up for goodness sakes.
      As for Merkel the back stabber, we fought Germany to stop their dominance in Europe once and in peace we also have to fight their might in the new diplomatic way and if we can’t we need to go it alone, watch German product sales fall if she carries on and we see her nation in all its superior ways.

      As for Coulson, we all have friends we’ve trusted over the years that have turned out to hurt us the worst when you find out they’ve betrayed your trust and faith in them full stop.

      • A.Sedgwick
        Posted June 25, 2014 at 3:12 pm | Permalink

        Why is Danny – Cameron’s mess?

        Who decided on a coalition rather a minority government?

        Who gave Clegg such a powerful position?

        Who gave the Libdems so many Cabinet posts?

        Cameron’s messes are endless.

        • Lifelogic
          Posted June 25, 2014 at 8:05 pm | Permalink

          Who threw away the last election by ratting on the “cast iron” promise and giving Clegg equal TV billing?

        • a-tracy
          Posted June 26, 2014 at 6:34 pm | Permalink

          I’m no fan of Cameron, I knew he’d be disastrous when he was selected over Davis but I think this is George Osborne’s problem to address. It’s his department, his assistant he needs to step up.

          In a way I hope that DC is made a laughing stock in Europe and the people keep seeing night after night just how isolated we are, and how disrespected and ineffective we are when nations vote against us who DONT PAY IN and the table turns to help us get out.

          It’s like a Labour government, people vote for them because they promise something for nothing, but when the books need balancing they have to vote in an alternative government to pay for it all. Let’s leave the Influencers in Europe paying up for their grand plan and taking in all of the social immigration. I believe most of us are happy to take in working, contributing social movers what we don’t need is more leeches, we have enough home grown people who think it’s their right to sit on their usually big bottoms taking with no give.

  4. Posted June 25, 2014 at 7:22 am | Permalink

    I fully agree with JR. I seem to remember seeing somewhere that Nick Clegg had stopped telling that particular lie.

  5. Mike Stanley
    Posted June 25, 2014 at 7:25 am | Permalink

    Oh dear Danny Alexander will have to do a lot better than this if he is to make a credible case for our present deal with Europe. I hope he is thoroughly nailed for such a dodgy claim. The thing is Nick Clegg makes the same claim too and never seems to be challenged by interviewers.

  6. Gina Dean
    Posted June 25, 2014 at 7:35 am | Permalink

    Again this old chestnut, I can’t remember when but there was an article that said the number of companies that are involved in the EU was very small compared to the companies in our country.
    So we will get all the negative thrown at us similar to the Scottish referendum. Just incase it is decided that the PM says out of the EU (here’s hoping).

  7. Denis Cooper
    Posted June 25, 2014 at 7:39 am | Permalink

    Maybe in this report there is the same “Important Note” that was attached to the CEBR report, but was mainly ignored by the media, back in March:

    “This piece of research does not imply that the estimated jobs would be lost if the UK were to leave the EU; it is an analysis of demand arising from UK exports to the EU.”

  8. Douglas Carter
    Posted June 25, 2014 at 8:01 am | Permalink

    As an incidental aside, Mr. Alexander, of the LibDems, displays the traditional lack of self-awareness in matters EU. His party is scant weeks from being subjected to the results of a national poll with regard to the EU. Their very publically fought pro-EU status was supported by fewer than 3% of the electorate, and their one single MEP was sent to Brussels from the vast majority of that 3%. Other than a tiny proportion in London, LibDem pro-EU policy has been definitively – categorically – rejected across the UK. Even yet has anyone taken them aside to point it out?

    As always the devil is in the detail. Whilst the 3 million figure which Clegg has desperately clung to for all these years is based on a report now fourteen years ago, and has been discredited for almost as long, this figure now appears to have been detailed in a relatively recent report for the Treasury.

    The figure remains meaningless unless and until the terms of reference of that report are published. Is it a Net consideration? Who commissioned it, (specifically ‘who’ – not ‘The Treasury’), under what terms was information included and excluded? The specific period in months and years (or decades) it might represent and whether there was any margin within the process which gave scope to investigate gains in employment that arising opportunities would bring?

    From where did the information come from? Multiple sources? EU sources? Sources ‘close’ to EU campaigning groups? Industrial Corporations and syndicates, Companies known already to favour EU membership? Overseas concerns already benefiting from ‘preferred’ status?

    There’s an awful lot of quite shameless propaganda that the EU gives form to. In advance – call me Mr. Cynical – but I’d be inclined to file this new Treasury report under that propaganda heading unless and until the full story behind the collation of the report can be scrutinised. These days, anyone with even moderate talents of deception can commission a report specifically designed to conclude exactly what you want it to.

    Being that the report as currently headlined appears to have been commissioned by a Government department in this case, rather than a political party, I would suggest that if it is indeed clearly contaminated by the tendrils of partisan contrivance, that it would rightly be seen as a disciplinary matter? Perhaps the scrutiny committee might wish to have a look at this one John?

  9. Sir Graphus
    Posted June 25, 2014 at 8:01 am | Permalink

    Someone said “if you repeat a lie often enough it becomes the truth”. The 3 million jobs lie is perilously close to proving this true.

    You must spend a lot of effort nailing it.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted June 25, 2014 at 8:10 pm | Permalink

      Indeed another “BBC think” (& much repeated) lie is that housing benefits all go to greedy unscrupulous landlords. It is the tenant that gets the accommodation is it not? It is like saying if one gives someone some money to someone to buy food all the money all goes to the evil greedy food shop.

      • Bazman
        Posted June 26, 2014 at 5:48 pm | Permalink

        A massive housing shortage means a rise in greedy unscrupulous landlords by default. If there was a shortage of food on the scale of housing then the same would apply. Have you seen the pay day loan company in trouble over fake legal letters? An industry you loath as a landlord as it takes a share of the pie often before rip off rents. Now imagine the housing market and imagine the rental rates if enough houses were built. Rent is not productive in an ever rising market due to shortage. Its rent.

        • Edward2
          Posted June 27, 2014 at 2:14 pm | Permalink

          There are many unscrupulous tenants out there as well Baz, who trash your property causing thousands of pounds worth of damage, fail to pay their rent leaving you with debts, or just refuse to leave until many months of expensive legal action.
          Its not the easy money you imagine.
          But Landlords are one of the marxist lefts pantomime villains and must be booed wherever they are found.

          • Bazman
            Posted June 29, 2014 at 10:11 am | Permalink

            Landlords are in way creating their own markets as the price of property rises and becomes ever further away from the averages persons reach. Plenty of dodgy tenants is true, but is not the argument.

  10. Brian Tomkinson
    Posted June 25, 2014 at 8:06 am | Permalink

    Challenge Alexander to a public debate on this issue and put him in his place; or aren’t you allowed to rock the boat and upset one of ‘the quad’?

  11. Chris
    Posted June 25, 2014 at 8:17 am | Permalink

    It is time for Cameron to nail this lie.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted June 25, 2014 at 9:58 am | Permalink

      I’m afraid he’s more likely to repeat it.

      • Lifelogic
        Posted June 25, 2014 at 8:12 pm | Permalink

        Repeat it will all his “heart and soul” and then mention how he does not want the UK to become a Great Switzerland (without any reasons being given).

        • Bazman
          Posted June 29, 2014 at 10:14 am | Permalink

          Why are you repeating this Greater Switzerland argument when you are unable to defend this nonsense?

  12. oldtimer
    Posted June 25, 2014 at 9:00 am | Permalink

    Regrettably such squalid stuff is the stock-in-trade of political discourse. Even worse was the Labour party “promise” of a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, subsequently ignored by Brown when he sneaked off to sign the treaty, hoping not to be noticed.

    In short. deceit all too frequently appears to be the default strategy of UK political parties. It needs to be exposed wherever and whenever it appears.

  13. Richard
    Posted June 25, 2014 at 9:15 am | Permalink

    If it were true then the Left would be campaigning to leave the EU.

  14. acorn
    Posted June 25, 2014 at 9:44 am | Permalink

    It is worth having a read of the following two docs. Getting Free Trade Agreements outside the EU Customs Union and Single Market ain’t going to be that easy. Getting access to the EU Internal Market in Financial Services will mean moving out of London and into Frankfurt I reckon.

    http://www.thecityuk.com/media/latest-news-from-thecityuk/leaving-eu-poses-very-significant-risks-to-uk-s-future-thecityuk-reports-provide-critical-analysis-of-the-economic-case-for-uk-s-eu-membership-and-legal-implications-of-alternatives/ .

    • Anonymous
      Posted June 25, 2014 at 10:02 pm | Permalink

      OK Acorn. So we remain within the EU, the federalist’s aims are met some way down the line and we become a super state. Does the City (Europe’s ‘banking centre’) remain ours in any sense other than its location ?

      Do we – the people – see any of the wealth ? Or is it siphoned off in EU taxes because it is owned by the EU ?

      Thus far we have been treated poorly by the EU on issues such as fishing and agriculture and the portents are, therefore, not good for banking.

      Our Commonwealth cousins (Canada, Australia, New Zealand) have done far better without the EU.

      • acorn
        Posted June 26, 2014 at 7:05 am | Permalink

        Our Commonwealth cousins (Canada, Australia, New Zealand) have done far better without the EU. Oh no they haven’t.

        Australia has several major FTAs with the EU. Canada has just concluded its biggest FTA with the EU; The Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA). New Zealand still has the UK as its major export partner but is establishing EU trade agreements with Germany and Netherlands so it can remain within the EU with a trade agreement, if the UK “brexits”.

  15. Martyn G
    Posted June 25, 2014 at 9:44 am | Permalink

    Well, let’s see. We are told that circa 5 million EU citizens have entered the UK over the past decade or so and it seems reasonable to suppose that 3 million of them are in gainful employment. If we leave the EU, all those without a UK passport would presumably have to depart the UK – 3 million of them, perhaps? It is disgraceful that such propaganda continues to be shoved at us without any solid evidence to support their conclusions.

  16. Paul
    Posted June 25, 2014 at 9:54 am | Permalink

    What else would you expect from the Lib Dems – the real party of fruitcakes and lunatics? The question you should be asking is why Cameron and no Conservative front bencher has come out and stated openly that this claim is simply a lie?

  17. Max Dunbar
    Posted June 25, 2014 at 10:26 am | Permalink

    Alexander will continue to perpetuate the lie regardless, using his formidable arsenal of numbing dullness, boredom, blandness and Cable.

  18. Posted June 25, 2014 at 10:38 am | Permalink

    If you want a lie nailed, do not ask a liar to do it. It lacks credibility.

    John Wrake.

    • Leslie Singleton
      Posted June 25, 2014 at 1:54 pm | Permalink

      Dear John–I confess to being thoroughly puzzled because you have failed to give me your imprimatur many times in the past for much less than your serious name calling today (which many on this site seem to have latched on to), meaning that Alexander I do not think for one minute is a liar. In other words I believe he believes what he is saying which makes it a mistake not a lie. And of course I do believe it is a mistake. It may also be relevant to point out that (especially in Nick Clegg’s case, at least of late) what has been largely said has been that there is a “link” (whatever that means) to the dreaded three million. And you will be aware I carry no brief for the LibDems–very very far from it. This is unlike you.

  19. Iain Gill
    Posted June 25, 2014 at 11:31 am | Permalink

    Call an election now, the liberals would be history.

  20. Tom William
    Posted June 25, 2014 at 11:51 am | Permalink

    Published by the Daily Telegraph (by an assistant political editor) without any attempt to mention a counter argument or historical discrediting of this canard. Is there now no editorial control in this paper (many other examples on different topics that are rubbish)?

  21. forthurst
    Posted June 25, 2014 at 1:10 pm | Permalink

    D. Alexander: “Indeed, the latest Treasury analysis shows that 3.3 million British jobs are connected to Britain’s place in Europe. That is the measure of the risk that isolationists would have us take.”

    The number of jobs is not a measure of risk at all; it says nothing about the likelihood of those jobs being lost once we have extricated ourselves from the EU’s demonic embrace. Perhaps the Treasury would like to produce some supporting evidence as to how this figure was concocted: are all these jobs involved in the export of goods and services to the EEA or do they include jobs involved in the provision of public services to foreigners on minimum wage, if documented at all? There are many foreigners on minimum wage providing services in private industry where the employer is able to utilise EU rules on corporation tax to their advantage; there are also more than a handful of small foreign owned businesses where profits are remitted in cash out of the UK.

    The cost of increasing the Treasury’s preferred headline figure of our financial health, the magical GDP, is small compensation if the real consequence of this was an increase in government borrowing and higher taxes in order to provide all the entitlements for those whose minimum wage yielded no direct income to the Treasury or those are who unemployed, having been discriminated against in favour of immigrants.

    Ultimately, the question of leaving or staying is not an economic one: it is whether we wish to abolish ourselves as a nation, our English Common law, the control of our borders and cede to the the EU the decision whether we continue as a prosperous nation or whether we should be relegated to a forgotten fringe starved of public investment in favour of elsewhere including New Europe; once we have ceased to be an autonomous nation, everything of significance will be controlled from Brussels, including the purse strings: that is the plan, their dream and our nightmare. As to the jobs involved in the export of goods and services, there may be losses, but certain gains in fishing and agriculture and many energy intensive industries and others where having a reliable supply of electricity, not overpriced and reliant on heavily subsidised ‘green crap’ for its provision, is considered desirable; then there is the whole of the rest of the world, a larger and growing market. Is it not time to focus on the real risks to our staying in and the real rewards from leaving the EU behind?

    • cunctator
      Posted June 30, 2014 at 1:12 pm | Permalink

      Forthurst, Well said, your last paragraph goes to the real nub of the argument. The corporate arguments about economics is mere venality. destroying the heart and soul of an independent people is a far, far more serious thing. With no heart and soul the economic failure will be even more certain. Perhaps a poster campaign, pamphlet dropping and bill-sticking of copies of your last paragraph should be instigated.

  22. Atlas
    Posted June 25, 2014 at 2:43 pm | Permalink

    Is that 3,000,000 jobs exactly or more likely 2,999,998 jobs?

    The precision of the Chief Secretary is a sight worth beholding as I don’t know how such an exact figure has applied for so long…

    • cosmic
      Posted June 25, 2014 at 10:33 pm | Permalink

      It has been as high as 3 and a half million jobs in some of the claims.

      As I recall it came from a study in the late 90s, and was an extrapolation from the proportion of GDP associated with ‘Europe’. The authors made no such claim and dissociated themselves from the extrapolation.

      Dubious as it is, it’s become a hardy perennial of pro-EU lore, particularly with the LibDems.

      The objection I have to it, apart from its dubious nature, is that it seeks to make what’s essentially a political question, “Who rules Britain and to whom do they answer?”, into an economic question posed in the crudest terms.

  23. Vanessa
    Posted June 25, 2014 at 3:03 pm | Permalink

    Dr Richard North, who wrote “The Great Deception” a history of the EU and how Britain was lied to right from the beginning, has posted on his website the whole book for free.
    http://eureferendum.com/documents/greatdeception.pdf – quite a generous thing to do. It is an astonishingly good read and should be sent far and wide to enable people to read the truth.

  24. JM
    Posted June 25, 2014 at 8:31 pm | Permalink

    The three million jobs figure might be a fiction, but there can be no doubt that should we leave the EU that matter will be taken into account by any multinational company making a decision where to site a new manufacturing plant or to build its new model of a product. The jobs would not disappear overnight, but they might well seep away gradually. Death by a thousand cuts. It appears we have to decide between a federal super state or economic pain. What joy! If only our politicians had not lied to us when we initially joined the EU.

    Reply They said that about what would happen if we did not join the Euro, but that turned out to be wrong.

    • JM
      Posted June 25, 2014 at 9:45 pm | Permalink

      True, but at least we remained within the EU and therefore within the tariff barriers.

    • Anonymous
      Posted June 25, 2014 at 10:06 pm | Permalink

      JM – We might be able to have lower energy prices without the EU. What of that then ?

    • libertarian
      Posted June 25, 2014 at 10:53 pm | Permalink

      Jm

      I don’t think you know very much about business in the 21st century. Which manufacturing company might relocate and why? The Toyota factory in Sunderland. The one that builds cars for the UK market? Or the 3 companies that manufacture 80% of the worlds mobile phone components? Which UK based production company relies totally on EU for its market? Please name them.

      By the way 85% of ALL economic activity is within the UK. Only 9% of economic activity is with the EU.

    • Jerry
      Posted June 26, 2014 at 6:33 am | Permalink

      JM: What about all our exports that do not enter another EU country, it won’t make any difference to them, also do not assume that all the 50% “EU exports” figure is correct as it is all tied up within the Rotterdam container port fudge, were our RotW exports only become official exports once they leave Rotterdam, thus our exports go to another EU country even though they will be shipped to the RotW.

      Also I don’t think the likes of JLR, Honda, Toyota or BMW, perhaps even Nissan (owned as it is by Renault) will be worried should the UK leave the EU, considering that the bulk of their production is not/would not be for the EU market, The same factors also apply to other manufacturing sectors in other fields beyond the car industry. Even without a trade agreement (in or outside of the EFTA/EEA) it is very unlikely that either the EU would stop doing trade with the UK, for one thing they sell us far to much just to abandon our markets.

  25. Alte Fritz
    Posted June 26, 2014 at 2:52 pm | Permalink

    Who remembers “Jobs for the boys” in 1975?

  26. Lindsay McDougall
    Posted June 27, 2014 at 11:57 pm | Permalink

    It must be demonstrated that it’s a lie, so as to convince people who work in companies that have a significant European market. We really do have to get our retaliation in first.

    • Lindsay McDougall
      Posted June 28, 2014 at 6:31 am | Permalink

      It’s worth publishing a pamphlet to demonstrate why it’s a lie, because in the run up to a referendum, this lie will be repeated ad nauseum. And Danny Alexander is the sort of plausible person that will be given the task. He has been one of Better Together’s better performers in the run up to the Scottish Referendum.

      It’s worth remembering why Nigel Farage is doing so well. Twice he took Nick Clegg head on and twice he won the argument.

  27. Posted June 29, 2014 at 5:55 am | Permalink

    The ‘three million jobs depend upon the European Union’ lobby never mention the loss of jobs to Europe, and Europeans, either by export or by the take up of those jobs by Europeans in the UK. There wouldn’t be any problem if there was equal two way traffic but as the Eurozone is in such poor economic shape that is just not possible right now.

    If they can make assertions like this without the slightest evidence, how about I make an assertion of 4 million jobs that we would otherwise have?

    Businesses that don’t exist, but otherwise would, and unemployed UK workers can’t hire a lobby group of course!

  • About John Redwood

    John Redwood has been the Member of Parliament for Wokingham since 1987. First attending Kent College, Canterbury, he graduated from Magdalen College, and has a DPhil from All Souls, Oxford. A businessman by background, he has been a director of NM Rothschild merchant bank and chairman of a quoted industrial PLC.
    Published and promoted by Thomas Puddy for John Redwood, both of 30 Rose Street Wokingham RG40 1XU
  • John’s Books

  • Email Alerts

    You can sign up to receive John's blog posts by e-mail by entering your e-mail address in the box below.

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

    The e-mail service is powered by Google's FeedBurner service. Your information is not shared.

  • Map of Visitors

    Locations of visitors to this page