Better off out – more prosperous and more democratic

The UK will be more prosperous, more democratic and more influential by leaving the EU – or by accepting a fundamental change to our relationship which takes us out of the centralising treaties.

Leaving will be better for people.
The UK can decide whether to enjoy £300 a year for every family every year as a tax cut, or whether to increase public spending. That’s how much we currently give to the EU to spend elsewhere on the continent.

The UK can guarantee to match all the EU payments to farmers, universities and regional projects out of the money we currently send to the EU and get back.

The UK could pursue a cheaper energy policy, taking people out of fuel poverty and aiding the industrial recovery of the UK.

Leaving the EU will let us be a freer and more democratic country.

The UK will be able to make her own decisions through Parliament as guided and informed by UK voters

The UK will regain control of her own business, environmental, criminal justice, migration and foreign policies amongst others

Once again we will live in a country where Parliament can change any law that needs changing

The UK people will be sovereign again, able to elect people who do their bidding without the interference or prohibition of EU laws.


  1. Lifelogic
    September 12, 2015

    Indeed it is hard to understand how anyone can think differently to this.

    Do people want some democracy restored or virtually non at all through the EU. Do they want to be governed by people that they can elect and remove? People who live in the UK understand the country and its people and speak English?

    Your £300 figure is hugely exceeded by the secondary benefits of deregulation, cheap energy and the rest that should follow. Getting rid of the pointless energy performance certificates, the green crap, all the various misguided market interference and the absurdly inefficient VAT system as examples.

    1. Lifelogic
      September 12, 2015

      I see that the Telegraph Editorial today says “the economy is strong thanks to sensible stewardship in the previous parliament” and “the July Budget was a stroke of political brilliance that branded the Tory party and the real workers’ party.”

      Who writes this utter drivel? Osborne’s budget was a disaster for the economy. It hugely increased taxes (and tax complexity) on the productive and diverted the money to largely pointless government waste.

      Osborne clearly thinks he should decide centrally on pay levels in all companies, without know the first thing about any of the businesses concerned. He is running a huge deficit, has a large and increasing state sector debt, the economy is badly unbalanced and has a huge balance of trade deficit too.

      On top of that he introduced a back door wealth tax on landlords (by stopping them deducting a legitimate interest), he ratted on his IHT promise while pretending he was keeping it, he made the tax systems even more complex and mugged pensions yet again. Meanwhile despite all this tax borrow and waste “public services” (as they like to call them) are generally very poor indeed and deteriorating by the day. With the exception of “public services” such as motorist mugging that is.

      True it would have been worse with Miliband & Balls (or Corbyn) but Osborne direction is wrong, wrong, wrong. It will not deliver a strong economy. He needs to cut taxes, reduce government, increase efficiency, get out of the EU and cut government waste. That is the route to winning the next election.

    2. Lifelogic
      September 12, 2015

      What a huge win for Corbyn – I think people are just heartily sick to death of professional politicians who just sit on the fence on every issue and never answer questions put to them, nor do what they promise. But clearly the labour partly has a death wish.

      It seems Tom Watson was told at the age of five that the three day week power cuts were caused by Ted Heath not paying the miners enough. So the poor socialist chap was being told complete nonsense even at age five. The miners were actually relatively well paid at the time. The power cuts were actually because Heath was an incompetent, lefty who thought he could control prices and incomes.

      Rather like the current Tory leadership in fact.

      Still Watson did support much needes change in organ donation laws I read.

    3. Lifelogic
      September 12, 2015

      Corbyn on about grotesque levels of “inequality” I see. What on earth is the man on about? You are often rather better off if you do not work in the UK than if you do. Has he ever actually looked at the figures.

      The main unfairness is the fact that the state sector (with pensions included) are 50% over paid relative to the private sector that is being bled dry to pay them. Many having no pensions at all over and above the state one.

      1. Hefner
        September 12, 2015

        According to ONS (
        in Q1 2015, total UK public sector was 5.372m, with 2.283m in UK local government, 2.909m in central government, 0.180m in UK public corporations. Private sector employment was 25.681m. So public sector was 17.3% of the total employed.
        For 2014, focusing on those who fall within:
        – the bottom 5% of earners, i.e.the lowest paid public sector workers earned on average around 12% more than private sector workers;
        – the top 5% of earners, i.e. the highest paid public sector workers earned on average around 8% less than the private sector workers.
        Pensions are usually proportional to salaries.

        1. Edward2
          September 13, 2015

          I wonder Hefner, if those figures includes the BBC, the huge quango sector and the huge charity sector who rely on the State for their income.
          I expect it just counts the minority who are classed as dircetly employed civil servants.
          Do these figure include NHS staff as public sector?

        2. James Sutherland
          September 13, 2015

          “Pensions are usually proportional to salaries.”

          You’ve almost completely missed the point there: central government staff in particular enjoy gold-plated pensions far, far more generous than their private-sector counterparts – so when you say the bottom few are “only” 12% better paid, you ignore the largest component of the difference in overall benefits package! Factor that in, and I think you’re the other side of the 30% mark – on top of having almost total job security and other non-financial advantages.

  2. JoeSoap
    September 12, 2015

    Surely, UKIP have said this all along and you have spent years pushing the Tory line that renegotiation would be best? Why wasn’t this posted by you last May?

    Tribal loyalty won out, I guess amongst Tory MPs, and the country lost out.

    Reply I am saying exactly the same as I said before the election. I have always said I want to restore UK democracy. Try reading what I write.

    1. Sean O'Hare
      September 12, 2015

      Yet you qualify your preference for leaving with:

      “..or by accepting a fundamental change to our relationship which takes us out of the centralising treaties..”

      That fundamental change envisaged by Cameron is no doubt the Associate Membership as set out in the Spinelli proposed Treaty “A Fundamental Law of the European Union”. I won’t provide a link, but you can easily find in on the EUReferendum site, with which I am sure you are familiar It will be renamed and dressed up as something else, but that is all that will be on offer.

      This is but the slow lane of a two-speed EU which will lead to exactly the same place. Please tell Cameron we know about it Associate Membership and we don’t want it. Leaving is the only way.

      Reply I am not seeking Associate membership and wish to see Uk democracy restored.

      1. Chris
        September 15, 2015

        I am heartily relieved to see John redwood’s response, and thank you Sean for getting that clarification. I fear that many others in the Eurosceptic group which JR supports are in favour of an Associate Membership of the EU.

        The eurosceptics should join forces and make it quite clear just what the Spinelli document envisages and in what ways it would still be highly disadvantageous for the UK. The IN group are relying on our ignorance, and although the internet has been key in dispelling many myths the OUT group have an uphill task.

        Many in the electorate will feel comforted by the term Associate Member, feeling that it gives them security but frees us from the political integration of the core. In reality we would not be free from the key features of the EU that so many eurosceptics find so problematical e.g. free movement of people, with accompanying waves of mass immigration, further loss of sovereignty, ever growing financial contributions towards the economic and political integration of the core, evermore regulation, no representation at the high tables of global organisations, instead being represented by a EU representative for the interested of all the Member States.

    2. Timaction
      September 12, 2015

      In Mr Redwoods defence he has been consistent on his stance with the EU. However, there are many in his party, probably the majority, who put tribal loyalty before the National interest.
      Will the Europhiles be made to tell the truth about their European project? The building of a Country by stealthy incremental Treaty changes. The lies about jobs at risk with a £77 billion trade deficit? The fishing and agricultural benefits, restoration of control on our borders? We don’t have to be in it to trade with the Countries in Europe, the biggest lie of all!
      The return of our sovereign democracy is paramount, nothing else will do!
      I read yesterday that the EU are looking at another power grab next year on immigration so CMD may want to bring the referendum forward before this hits the fan. I am at a total loss to understand any benefit for staying in this undemocratic organisation that ALWAYS rules against us and at great cost. We should have some show trials for all those treacherous individuals who have lied and lied again to the British people over their treaties and intentions!

    3. JoeSoap
      September 13, 2015

      April 5 2015
      A new relationship with the rest of the EU
      “I will support a renegotiation which seeks to restore UK democratic control over borders, tax, welfare and energy.”

      (“Rest of the EU” inferring that we remain members, renegotiation meaning that we remain members?? More than a strong implication that you support us remaining in the EU)

      September 12 2015
      “Better off out”
      (More than a strong implication that you want us out)

      Which is it to be, in or out please?
      Are we in with a successful renegotiation on these important points, or out with an egg-faced Cameron and a waste of time and money renegotiatiing?

      Either a change of position between these two or perhaps I am misunderstanding?

      Reply Yes, a deliberate misunderstanding. I have always made my opposition to the present treaties clear, and also said I want a new relationship based on trade and co-operation instead. The renegotiation is a prelude to the referendum which I have argued for and voted for and have now helped secure. The referendum gives us the way out, assuming we cannot negotiate our democracy back without simply leaving.

  3. margaret
    September 12, 2015

    In full agreement with those points ; no need to waffle on.
    P.S. As an English gardener I hope the weather stays for this weekend for all those who similarly want to keep our national English and everyman’s hobby.

  4. Peter van Leeuwen
    September 12, 2015

    Interestingly, the Dutch net EU cost per day were rather higher, about one euro per Dutchman per day, but the EU benefits (to the economy) are estimated at about six euro per Dutchman per day.
    The eurosceptics in the UK of course may see no benefits at all for Britain.
    It will be interesting to watch what UK europhiles and independent think tanks will calculate, once the campaigns start. Economically, Britain is not all that different from The Netherlands.

    1. agricola
      September 12, 2015

      It rather depends on how you view the future of a depreciating Euro. On todays figures your fellow countrymen pay , on your figures Eu. 365 PA. or £268.38.
      Are your figures for every Dutch man , woman and child or per earning person. John’s £300 per family per annum is equally imprecise. I believe to most Englishmen it is not the precise cost that matters, it is our sovereignty that is paramount.

      1. Peter van Leeuwen
        September 13, 2015

        @agricola: the rule of thumb figure of €6 a day (or €2000 a year) is for every Dutch citizen (all 16 million) or 4% of GDP. The source is the Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis (CPB)

    2. Douglas Carter
      September 12, 2015

      Hello Peter.

      ‘Estimated’ – not proven.

      Discussing ‘estimates’ from various and disparate ‘independent’ sources could be an occupation for many hundreds of people for the next six centuries. There have been plenty of advantageous ‘estimates’ demonstrating the relative advantage of UK withdrawal. Has it made the remotest impact on the debate?


      It’s a completely unprofitable debating stance, frequently rotating around questionable statistics and transient ‘facts’.

      However, more likely is that the Netherlands derives advantage from Single Market membership – a trading\economic body; and not the EU, a political body.

      As has been proven quite comprehensively elsewhere, not only can non-EU members reside within the Single Market, they retain influential voting and negotiating rights within it.

      The EU withdrawal case is not an economic one – it’s a matter of plain democracy. Who governs, how, and by what means are they held accountable?

      1. Peter van Leeuwen
        September 13, 2015

        @Douglas Carter: You are correct that the advantage is derived from the Single Market. You are also correct that access to the Single Market remains possible for some countries outside the EU but still part of the EEA (European Economic Area), e.g. Norway. Such access doesn’t come free of charge though, and leaving the EU wouldn’t lead to a money hand-out as far as I can see. Staying or leaving will more likely be chosen on a gut-feeling of wanting to belong or not wanting to belong.

        Reply All non member countries like China and the USA trade very successfully with the EU!

        1. Peter van Leeuwen
          September 13, 2015

          True! Which also shows that one has to be outside the EU (or even the Eurozone) to trade well with China and the USA!
          And yes, if the UK choses to go for the “WTO-option”i.e. totally disentangled from EEA” it can still trade successfully with us and other continents.

          1. Peter van Leeuwen
            September 13, 2015

            Sorry- Freudian slip – one does NOT have to be outside the EU or Euro area to trade successfully with the whole world! 🙂

    3. Anonymous
      September 12, 2015

      Peter v L

      You’re right again. Not on the figures. But on the fact that the economic debate is in muddied water – and sends most voters to sleep.

      Far better to fight on two very clear issues:

      “Three million jobs lost ” Vs “Immigration cannot be controlled”

      Only this will wake the electorate up.

      What use three million jobs if the EU forces us to take in limitless numbers of people to pay for them ? Whilst meeting their emission targets too !

      Let this referendum be about mass immigration. There is no more important issue. If the people vote for it then so be it.

      1. Peter van Leeuwen
        September 13, 2015

        @Anonymous: The same national bureau (Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis) also calculated that immigrants since 2004 proved a net benefit to the Dutch economy. If a country (and its municipalities) can deal with the pressure caused by immigration (housing, schooling, language, culture) then immigrants proof to be an economic advantage to the country. The centuries ago “Dutch golden age” is a story about immigrants, the USA is a country of immigrants.

        1. Chris
          September 15, 2015

          A government’s job is to balance various factors. It is no good generating economic growth if you cause social fracturing, hardship and suffering for your own people, and destroy the national identity. It would therefore appear that it is a battle between those who want to make money at all costs e.g. the globalists and big business and those who want balanced development, and who recognise that people are not simply tools to generate money for business and governments. I am hugely concerned by the reported comments of Peter Sutherland speaking to a Parliamentary Committee in his UN role. It would appear that he is a fervent advocate of mass immigration and the destruction of the “homogeneity” of individual nations. Furthermore, I believe he and many others consider that mass immigration is a highly effective tool for global wealth redistribution and thus will continue to promote mass movements of population, regardless of the huge pressures and damage they can inflict on the host nations.

      2. libertarian
        September 14, 2015


        There is nil, zero , zilch chance of losing 3 million jobs on exit from the EU

        We could however GAIN 3 million. By leaving a lot of Europeans would no longer automatically be able to work here, claim benefits or use the NHS so would leave thus creating job vacancies

    4. agricola
      September 12, 2015

      The next question is more of a moral one. How come a solvent successful country like Holland manages to benefit to the tune of Eu 6 per day when half of the EU is in a parlous financial state and in need of support. It would seem you need to pay more into the EU coffers.

      1. Peter van Leeuwen
        September 13, 2015

        @agricola: I was pointing to the economic benefits of being part of the EU and its single market, something that counts for all EU members, including the UK, if you don’t mind me saying so.

    5. Atlas
      September 12, 2015

      But Peter – the ability to set your own laws instead of being a surf to those who run the EU is worth it.

      1. miami.mode
        September 12, 2015

        The EU surfing over the serfs.

      2. Peter van Leeuwen
        September 13, 2015

        @Atlas: Also outside the EU this may show to be a perception, much more than a reality, as you will still be quite interdependent.
        Then again, some people get cured by perceptions, when they are given a panacea. Maybe leaving the EU will be such a panacea for you.

    6. oldtimer
      September 12, 2015

      No doubt some europhile will, again, say that “3 million jobs are at risk”. I read the report from which that number was obtained; on the same misreading it could also be said that “over 4 million jobs are at risk” in the rest of the EU.

      The reality is that estimates of the wider economic impact is guesswork and will be lost among the wider forces at work – such as the evolution of the Chinese economy, trends in commodity prices (especially oil and gas) and other disruptive events.

      The core issue is political.

      1. Peter van Leeuwen
        September 13, 2015

        @oldtimer: Yes the core issues are much more political. I can see good political arguments for the Uk to remain an EU member.

    7. Timaction
      September 12, 2015

      Peter Van EU. You don’t have to be in the EU to trade with it. Ask China, Japan, USA etc. Stop the deceit! The EU is a non democratic dictatorship that imposes huge costs, laws and unwanted regulation on the British people. Its a left wing socialist monster that we want out of. Your arguments are lost! We are the 5th largest economy in the world and don’t need you!

      1. Timaction
        September 13, 2015

        No answer Mr Van EU?

        1. Peter van Leeuwen
          September 13, 2015

          @Timaction: As you keep calling EU a non-democratic dictatorship and I take offence to that, discussion becomes a bit futile.

          1. Timaction
            September 14, 2015

            When did we elect Messrs Junker or any of the Commission who make all the laws and regulations? Unelected is unelected in any language other than EU speak. How can we remove any of them if as always we disapprove their laws or regulations? We are way beyond offensive. I find it infuriating to be taxed to pay for this monstrous body!

    8. lojolondon
      September 12, 2015

      Peter, that is fake accounting – there is no benefit to the Netherlands. I think you know the Netherlands is a nett contributor to the EU. Only the poorest countries like Romania do “gain” from the EU, who print money and spend it there – but as we know they will end up like Greece, so no real gain.

      1. Peter van Leeuwen
        September 13, 2015

        @lojolondon: Not so. There is real economic benefit for all the members of the EU. That is why countries often aspire to become closer related to the EU or become an EU member. The figures I mention come from the
        “Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis (CPB)”, which was founded in 1945.
        Research at CPB is carried out on CPB’s own initiative, or at the request of the government, parliament, individual members of parliament, national trade unions or employers federations. All these actors, and all (12?) Dutch political parties rely on and refer to its independent research.
        I only know of Norway having a similar independent national office. In the UK, such research is much more politicized and disputable.

    9. Bob
      September 12, 2015

      @Pete van Leeuwen

      You can’t put a price on freedom.
      Did your family fight the Nazis?
      If so, was it because they were weighing up the financial benefits?

  5. ChrisS
    September 12, 2015

    “The UK will be able to make her own decisions through Parliament as guided and informed by UK voters”

    Regrettably this is unlikely to come to pass, judging by the overwhelming rejection by MPs yesterday of the assisted dying bill which is directly contradictory to the views of the public.

    Turning to the Syria, I believe it is our PM and Foreign Secretary who are taking the lead and the correct action over Syria, refugees and economic migrants. Helping genuine refugees from the conflict to remain near their own country so that they can return and rebuild at some point is clearly in the best long-term interest of Syria as a whole. This also exposes the vast majority of those travelling onward for what they really are : economic migrants. Andrew Mitchell’s safe zone policy should also be adopted within Syria’s own borders to ease the problems of Jordan and Lebanon.

    Frau Merkel is profoundly misguided by effectively opening the borders of Europe and inviting in 850,000 migrants this year. What is she going to do next year when 2 million turn up as a result of this policy ?

    Even worse, this one woman is effectively being allowed to change the immigration policy of the whole of the EU, including the UK, given that all 850,000 arriving this year will be able to come to the UK or any other EU country when they gain German citizenship, as most will.

    Every one of those people arriving in Germany are economic migrants, having already been in safe countries like Turkey, Italy or Greece. Some, like the father of that poor young boy drowned on the beach of Bodrum, having lived there in safety for several years, before recklessly risking and subsequently loosing the lives of his wife and children in an attempt to get into the EU.

    This might just be the tipping point that wins us the referendum. If it wasn’t clear before to the average Brit why we need control of our own borders, there cannot be any doubt now.

    Reply I consulted widely in my constituency about assisted dying. The responses were almost equal on the two sides of the debate.

    1. Hefner
      September 12, 2015

      Mr Redwood,
      How did you widely consult? I don’t remember receiving anything from you asking what I was thinking. Who have you consulted? Only the Wokingham Conservatives? And what made you decide in the end the way you voted?

      Reply I have invited comments and received a substantial number of emails and other responses. I was particularly persuaded by the strong representations from doctors and from their professional bodies against the whole idea, as the whole Bill rested on doctors being willing and able to certify someone would die within six months, and then to supply the drugs.

      1. Hefner
        September 12, 2015

        Thanks for your answer.

      2. margaret
        September 12, 2015

        Surely this is work for an ethics committee. Doctors do not have moral say on whether someone is to live or die. I centred my first dissertation on this subject and there are many professionals out there who have intensively studied the ethics of this from all perspectives.

    2. DaveM
      September 12, 2015

      I agree that Cameron has made the right decision on the refugee/migrant issue. I’m just not convinced he won’t bow to the pressure of the tree-hugging, placard-waving bleeding hearts who think we should all beggar ourselves and sacrifice the country our grandchildren should inherit, in order to take in all the 20-30 year-old men who have left their families to fend for themselves in war zones.

      I think Mr Redwood’s post today is exactly the kind of introductory article which should be published in papers like The Sun. Linking to yesterday’s post, there’s no way the BBC will allow that kind of rhetoric to be broadcast without a shouty pro-EU counterview.

      The BBC is getting ever so excited about the prospect of Corbyn becoming Labour leader – no doubt there will a lot of far-left champagne socialist celebs on telly chatting and laughing with fondness about the lovable chap with a beard and sandals (and mad policies which will destroy the economy).

    3. Anonymous
      September 12, 2015

      “Some, like the father of that poor young boy drowned on the beach of Bodrum, … living in safety for three years…”

      There is a strong accusation from a survivor that this man was (words left out ed) driving the boat. You won’t hear the BBC reporting that either.

      1. Timaction
        September 12, 2015

        It is reported in the Express and already on Breitbart. The Father may not have told a truthful account.

    4. JoolsB
      September 12, 2015

      Reply to reply:-
      And have you also consulted widely with your constituents John on whether they would like a referendum on an English Parliament, you know the sort of referendum the people of Scotland and Wales have already been granted on more than one occasion. Thought not. Because the UK will NEVER be a democracy even if we pull out of the EU, until England is granted equality both constitutionally and financially with the other nations of this so called United Kingdom.

      Reply I have not consulted on whether they would like a referendum on England or not, because I see no prospect of securing one at the moment and I do not believe in misleading people. I have consulted on fairness for England, and seen polling confirming support for the stance I have taken on this crucial matter. I did help secure the EU referendum as I promised in the 2010 election to do.

    5. Anonymous
      September 12, 2015

      “Reply I consulted widely in my constituency about assisted dying. The responses were almost equal on the two sides of the debate.”

      Some were dead against.

    6. dennisambler
      September 12, 2015

      “overwhelming rejection by MPs yesterday of the assisted dying bill which is directly contradictory to the views of the public.”

      Have the public been asked? As John says, there is a big split on the issue. The rest of it I agree with.

    7. miami.mode
      September 12, 2015


      Your point about economic migrants is doubtless true of many but in the Guardian on-line a day or two ago, in an interview with a Syrian migrant, he claimed he had left to avoid conscription.

      1. Rita Webb (Mrs)
        September 12, 2015

        Whats wrong with that Bush and Clinton were both effectively draft dodgers? If conscription were reintroduced here I would have no shame if my son and heir did a runner

    8. forthurst
      September 12, 2015

      “Some, like the father of that poor young boy drowned on the beach of Bodrum, having lived there in safety for several years, before recklessly risking and subsequently loosing the lives of his wife and children in an attempt to get into the EU.”

      Actually the child’s remains were found in a cove; Reuters may be able to explain how therefore they were able to create the ‘iconic’ photograph which was used to groom the ignorant masses and to influence politicians, whose only interests are short term popularity, to act knowingly out of their own countries’ best interests.

      In point of fact, the explanation for the drowning of the Kurdi family, originally given by Aylan Kurdi, the father, never made any sense; etc ed

    9. M Davis
      September 12, 2015

      … the assisted dying bill which is directly contradictory to the views of the public. …

      It maybe contradictory to the MSM’s distorted viewpoint but is certainly not contradictory to mine!

    10. Bill
      September 12, 2015

      ‘directly contradictory to the views of the public’?

      In that case bring back capital punishment because the public has long supported that and Parliament has consistently rejected it. You have to give your MP some leeway in making decisions.

      For myself, I remember the passing of the 1967 Act that legalised abortion. We were told that there would be few abortions and only in certain circumstances. We now have over 180,000 abortions per year. It is an industry. Do you seriously doubt that within a decade or two, the same would not apply? You would have old, depressed, handicapped and other people being bumped off. No thank you.

  6. Graham Wood
    September 12, 2015

    JR. Thank you for an excellent summary of primary reasons why we must leave the EU.
    I would have thought that for other members of your party who remain as “ins” these should be sufficient reasons to seriously think again and change.
    As you so consistently point out. – what can be more important for the UK than self- governance?
    Sadly your leader does not share this democratic vision of a free Britain, and it seems increasingly clear that his renegotiation exchanges with other EU member states leaders will take us nowhere near these clear advantages of a Brexit.
    One other small point : The advantages are politically sensible and doable – I wonder then why sections of the media continue to call you and fellow eurorealists. “Rebels”?

    1. Timaction
      September 12, 2015

      We still don’t know what CMD is actually negotiating but I’m sure it will be much about nothing. Then we have the orchestrated fall out with the French before the Chamberlain moment. In the age of the internet we have an analogue leader in a digital age!! We all now know not to rely on the Government led msm!

  7. Douglas Carter
    September 12, 2015

    …with an added implied advantage that Parliament must once again adopt full accountable responsibility for those policies – no more convenient hiding behind the EU’s capacious skirts of excuses.

    Not certain how many problems it will solve within the EU however. Many Northern European nations allegedly want the UK to remain in the EU because we are apparently a valuable counterbalance to the voting rights of nations which wish to take the EU in the ‘wrong’ direction. Whilst simultaneously being held by the same Northern Nations as being nothing but trouble and an obstacle to ‘progress’. (Currently unidentified – and unidentifiable progress, but, well, there you go…) I do wish they’d make their minds up?

    Similarly, I hear Europhiles trotting out the same, fairly irrelevant notion that ‘the EU can only proceed with the unanimous agreement of its member states’. A bland distraction which implies that if solely Luxembourg did not agree with a minor sub-amendment in the advance preparation of a treaty, that Treaty would be ditched in its entirety in deference to their opposition?

    Whereas the real fact is that to disagree with EU ‘progress’ is seen as a base affront to the entire edifice and the needs of that nation will be blithely disregarded as a tedious nuisance (save, only nations without the economic might to really matter in the eyes of the true power bases within the EU).

    On this occasion, it’s even quite difficult for UK Europhiles to convincingly lend support for continued Membership of the EU, nor for ‘Associate Membership’ (or whatever it will be called after its strategic fig-leaf name change).

    Because, as of today, they can’t give us an illustration of either, as they will stand in ten year’s time. It’s a very odd stance, lending complete and comprehensive advance support for a blank sheet of paper?

  8. Rita Webb (Mrs)
    September 12, 2015

    Anybody who believes any of the above will come to fruition probably believes in the tooth fairy too. In the meantime Parliament exercises its remaining powers in the following fashion. Anyone from outside the EU can come in and be given a generous starter package of free healthcare, education and pocket money. Its now 2015 and we still continue with the neo-lib economic agenda that failed in 2007/8. While given a barely credible excuse, we will be dragged into a series of more foreign wars because we now have a “right to protect”. Corbyn is a good thing because he will purge Labour of those who believe in the “consensus”. Its time for someone to purge the Conservatives of those people too. Its only a matter of time before the economy provides a catalyst.

  9. Ex-expat Colin
    September 12, 2015

    Wouldn’t it be nice…once again! Sadly someone’s super dream leaves a dire mess to be rectified.

    Prepare to fork out more money to stop invasion from other M. East countries. Begging bowl out from the Turks I hear. When they all get here will they fight for us…not for their own are they?

    Trump and big walls…there’s a thing!

    1. Timaction
      September 12, 2015

      Just been reading a German report from the Bertelsmann Institute regarding German demographics from March this year. Then I started to think why Germany would welcome 800,000 migrants this year. It turns out they need 500,000 every year from outside the EU as its predicted that EU immigration will cease in the next few years and they have a significant reduction in German births and people living longer. Call me a cynic but I wonder why after more than 4 years of war we’re getting this mass migration problem across Europe? Just saying!

  10. agricola
    September 12, 2015

    Comprehensively itemised, and once voted for we will need a new set of ministers to ensure that the wishes of the people are carried out in spirit and practice.

    As there are option as to the way we leave and the relationship with the EU from then on, it might be helpful to lay them on the table. We do not want to arrive at that happy day and find there is nothing there to effect the decision of the electorate, apart from another lengthy political argument . When you see the results of the devolution for Scotland decision, and the as yet unresolved West Lothian Question, you can perhaps understand where I am coming from. The electorate will not thank you for allowing the decision to be diluted in practise.

  11. Denis Cooper
    September 12, 2015

    Well, JR, you can join some, a few, colleagues by signing up as a supporter here:

    There is a referendum campaign being organised, but for now they seem to prefer to tell supporters about it by email rather than publicising it on their website; however it is mentioned in the most recent Brexit magazine:

    Personally I think “Better Off Out” would probably be the best name for the official referendum campaign to leave the EU, especially now that any campaign based around the word “No” would no longer reflect the question which will be asked.

    1. formula57
      September 12, 2015

      And the best unofficial name would be “Better Out than In”. 😉

  12. Mike Stallard
    September 12, 2015

    Mr Redwood, we are going to be presented with two choices in 2017.

    The first is to leave the EU completely. The downside to this is going to be a break in our trade and consequent hiatus in our very shaky financial and economic arrangements. The upside is a possible rebirth of our national pride and in our newly won independence.

    The second is AM (Associate Membership). This will involve obeying the four freedoms, the ECHR, the list of things we have to do to be part of the single market and a minuscule voice in the Parliament, and possibly in the Commission and Council. We will still receive Directives which will be nodded through by statutory instrument without parliamentary discussion.

    From this post, it appears you intend to vote for the first possibility. So where does that leave your future within Mr Cameron’s Conservative Party?

    (PS You needn’t post this if you do not want to.)

    Reply I do not agree that leaving will interrupt our trade, and it will place me where I already am in the Conservative party!

  13. Antisthenes
    September 12, 2015

    If we vote to leave the EU, which of course we will not David Cameron, UK europhiles and the Commissars of Brussels will see to that. Even in the remote chance that we vote to leave Brussels will just make us keep voting again and and again until we vote to remain(they have form when it comes to manipulating referenda, just change the wording a bit but not the substance that does the trick). We will stay in as we will be offered associate membership sometime in the next decade which will be touted as the great reform.

    It will not be of course it will lead to non euro-zone states being treated as second class states who have to sit in the naughty corner until they mend their ways and sign up to the full deal.

    On the remote chance of us leaving the EU and the less remote chance of Corbyn being today elected Labour leader and eventually prime minister we will end up leaving the EUSSR and instead embrace a UKSSR.

  14. Brian Tomkinson
    September 12, 2015

    JR: “The UK will be more prosperous, more democratic and more influential by leaving the EU – or by accepting a fundamental change to our relationship which takes us out of the centralising treaties.”
    These scenarios are not equivalent. As far as the second is concerned it sounds like cloud cuckoo land, but no doubt the sort of mumbo jumbo your leader and Osborne will adopt to con people into voting to remain in this increasingly tyrannical organisation.
    There can be only one way of becomining “more prosperous, more democratic and more influential” and that is to leave the EU. To quote your leader – no ifs, no buts.

  15. Nick
    September 12, 2015

    The UK people will be sovereign again, able to elect people who do their bidding without the interference or prohibition of EU laws.


    Sorry, I’ve just fallen off my chair and injured myself.

    Run that one past me again.

    Where the hell do you get the idea that we tell you what to do?

    1. Mike Stallard
      September 12, 2015

      “We” – and who, pray is “we”?
      If you are a member of the Commission, then you know the answer perfectly well – Directives turned into statutory instruments passed into law without parliament.
      If you are not, I hope your injuries are soon cured and that you can look it up on the internet.

  16. oldtimer
    September 12, 2015

    Agreed on all counts.

  17. Peter Stroud
    September 12, 2015

    We certainly would be better off out. The way the EU is dealing with the refugee crisis, and the arrogance of Frau Merkel, are further reasons for us to work for an OUT vote in the referendum. Merkel handled the entire matter so that only German interests are satisfied, i.e. solving Germany’s labour shortage. She then displayed unbelievable arrogance by attempting to direct other sovereign states to take quotas of the migrants. When are we going to see a senior level summit to coordinate the response to this crisis? The matter is becoming urgent.

    September 12, 2015

    It is not a vote winner to say leaving the EU would make us LESS prosperous. But for my part, regaining some of our freedom by leaving the EU is worth losing a couple of bob and money back on empty beer bottles if that is what it entails.

    Having more democracy sounds good too. But one should not believe everything the EU does albeit UNdemocratically is in itself bad or even evil. Margot Parker MEP, UKIP spokeswoman on small business in an article published Sept 10 2015 condemned the ECJ for ” interfering in British small business after they ruled today that time spent travelling to and from appointments by workers with no fixed office should be classed as working time.”
    I could mention a number of companies who have given a worker a “patch” close to home and then extended its area and even swapped the “patch” for one at great distance inflicting economically crippling fuel costs. The ECJ decision IS interfering and, in the absence of small-business-priesthoods or a government which sees workers as primarily British, then the decision was sound.

    In short, an exit from the EU, should be predicated on a completely new deal for all people in the Realm. Small business people or big business people or successful footballers and pop singers are not MORE British by their success. Red tape and regulation should indeed be kept away from small businesses. But not until they show more evidence than they have thus presented that they honour our flag.

  19. Bert Young
    September 12, 2015

    All of the benefits listed are those that must be highlighted in the forthcoming campaign in support of the “No” vote . Each of them is valid and has wide appeal to the electorate . Contrary to PvL’s response , the UK is not a “nett benefiter” from the EU – financially , socially or morally ; EU countries – particularly Germany , have huge surpluses from their trade with the UK and stand to lose were they to adopt a “won’t deal” decision if the “No” vote wins .

    Once again I draw attention to Iain Mansfield’s Brexit Prize analysis to the Institute of Economic Affairs published in 2014 ; he instances a £1.3bn increase in our GDP were we to leave the EU . He argued that a “no” vote would ensure the maintenance of zero tariffs on trade between the UK and the EU in all areas apart from agriculture ; staying in would mean retaining almost all of the most onerous and controversial aspects of EU membership . What he proposed was negotiating membership of EFTA and deepening our engagement with the G8 , G20 and OECD etc .

  20. Edward M
    September 12, 2015

    Very clear, meaningful, concise statements, which I totally agree with.
    Its about the fundamentals of our national sovereignty and democratic accountability, do we decide or do we let others decide and tax us.
    Putting the argument with such clarity will hopefully win over the “don’t knows” for the leave side – and even cause some europhiles to reconsider their position – one can hope.

  21. margaret
    September 12, 2015

    Now we have the results of the labour party, democracy is again what the new leader was talking about. The responses on twitter is how he will ruin the UK for the working people. If this means that people will be salaried again and those who were thrown out of the NHS in their 40’s 50’s and 60’s to the lions, to fight for a living on a daily basis and watch under labour less qualified staff coming from other countries to bring the NHS down, I am all for it.
    The opposition speak as though Corbyn is in power rather than in opposition. I love the thought of humanity leading without ruining the strength of GB, so we will have to see how it goes. I myself am a conservative socialist. I have been treated badly by unions , I have been treated badly by non unions. We can only go by our experience . Lets see what happens. Many of us are floating voters , looking round for success and sincerity.The proof of the pudding etc..

  22. bigneil
    September 12, 2015

    I agree with you John, but it won’t happen. The untrustworthy liar is hellbent on staying in, with the resultant destruction of this nation. He promised immigration down to “tens of thousands” – -then promised it again. Is there nothing he won’t lie about? Still, the money needed to house, give money to and fund all their free NHS has to come from somewhere – and it is going to be robbed off the English worker. We now hear that the new state pension is not going to deliver what was promised – -yet again – lies lies and lies.
    For them, tell any story you want – don’t take papers, no proof of ID, don’t say if you’re a murderer, rapist or paedophile – and the English govt will hand you a free life.
    So, looking at it from THEIR side – why even bother working, just sit back in your taxpayer funded and maintained council house, collect your taxpayer funded cash, trot off for your taxpayer funded NHS treatment – -and watch the English slaves go to work, just to earn your free lives for you.

  23. forthurst
    September 12, 2015

    “The UK can guarantee to match all the EU payments to farmers, universities and regional projects out of the money we currently send to the EU and get back.

    The UK could pursue a cheaper energy policy, taking people out of fuel poverty and aiding the industrial recovery of the UK.”

    Should the CAP be taken as a benchmark for how taxpayers’ money should be used post Brexit? What about the CFD of which no mention has been made? Our country, our rules; neither the CAP nor CFD is an appropriate template for the future. One assistance that could be given to working farmers is to tax heavily those banksters and other that regard the basic tool of agricultural production, land, as an investment vehicle, so that land values reflect the yields that working farmers can achieve.

    With regard to energy policy, the wiki entry based on 2008 figures, a date in ignominy, therefore particularly out of date for the UK, should give even those simple souls who have been groomed successfully by the heavily infiltrated BBC to believe in the Global Warming Hoax pause for thought provided they can manage elementary arithmetic: e.g the UK’s generation of electricity amounts to <2% of World consumption; the only non-carbon based generation methods which make significant contributions to SavingthePlanet™ are nuclear and hydro; PV's conribution is 0.06%; DRAX and its ilk contributes 0.01% (the lunatics really have taken over the asylum); the countries that make a lot of stuff, particularly from mineral deposits, use a lot of electricity so we cannot improve our industrial performance in the short to medium term without filling the air with more CO2.

  24. PaulDirac
    September 12, 2015

    Yes indeed, better out by a large margin.
    Interesting how the Corbyn win will play out, looks better for the European (Out) side, but if he gets into #10 we are in for a new axis: Cuba, UK, Russia & China).
    Once into the hands of Unite – it will take 80 years or more to regain democracy here.

    1. Rita Webb (Mrsh
      September 12, 2015

      Cobblers by virtue of his parlimentary pension fund he is already a millionaire through his length of service. That is apart from any property he owns in London as I do not believe he lives in a council house. Knowing where his bread is buttered, if it comes to the crunch, he would do as he was told just like SYRIZA. Remember earlier on this year they were being touted as Greece’s answer to the Socialist Workers Party.

      1. forthurst
        September 12, 2015

        Rita, our money comes from the BoE, so we are unlikely to get a visit from the Troika.

        1. Rita Webb (Mrs)
          September 13, 2015

          Not referring to doing as he is told by the EU try the Anglo American banking cartel etc

    2. Lifelogic
      September 12, 2015


      1. Rita Webb (Mrs)
        September 12, 2015

        His likely choice of shadow chancellor is another one (pension fund millioniaress and non council house dweller). Son sent to a fee paying school, then to Cambridge and he is now in the FCO. I thought this sort of privilege finished with Alec Douglas-Home?

  25. forthurst
    September 12, 2015

    ….the figures for electricity generation were incorrect; in my haste, I picked some of the wrong data: the values for PV are .05% and Bio, 1%; apologies.

  26. Lifelogic
    September 12, 2015

    Yes but what a duff choice, you can have a high tax, lefty, tax borrow and waste, EUphile, green crap loving, debt loving, command economy with duff public services under Cameron and Osborne, or you can have an even worse luny lefty government. One to a large degree run by the state sector unions that will doubtless bankrupt the country again.

    The first is better than the second but only as the prospect of the second is so appalling. What is needed is a proper Tory sense of direction and a sensible person as Chancellor in number 11.

  27. Shieldsman
    September 12, 2015

    If we do not vote to leave and fully withdraw from the EU the United Kingdom will be in trouble.
    As you have previously pointed out ‘status quo’ is not on offer. It is likely to be an expensive second rate deal as some type of associate, or join the EURO.
    If you read the Five Presidents Report and the Spinelli Group papers you can see the outline of future treaties. Greater political and financial integration is necessary to shore up the EURO.
    The invasion of Europe by migrants seeking a better life is causing a problem and the freedom of movement means they could end up in the UK. Look how the Somali’s granted asylum in Holland moved to Bristol.

  28. libertarian
    September 12, 2015


    “Corbyn and Watson, so we are back to a proper two party system again with a real choice. I am happy about that.”

    Indeed but as the second party is now the SNP it just becomes an England v Scotland game, which really helps no one

    September 12, 2015

    Oh, Congratulations to Mr Corbyn on a convincing victory in the Labour party Leadership battle.
    Mr Cameron has not offered congratulations yet. Mr Fallon the Defence Minister mentioned something about Mr Corbyn but as usual did not mention human rights abuses in Bahrain where the Royal Navy’s one boat is anchored or undergoing repair.

    Ms Priti Patel, who I thought was Unemployment Minister but was billed as Pensions Minister by the TV, spoke little of Mr Corbyn’s DIY economics agenda but also concentrated on the threat posed by his ideas on defence.
    So, perhaps in any swap around of Ministers, Ms Patel could take Mr Fallon’s job.

    The decision may well be for the British electorate: Do we trust Mr Corbyn after he has got rid of Trident Nuclear armaments or do we trust Priti Patel with her finger on Britain’s nuclear button?
    The Tory Party as well as the Labour Party needs to think very carefully.

    September 12, 2015

    You need to look at your own site John to see who has more coverage than others.. I usually am on your side, but this constant highlighting of a few bloggers and their repetitious views seems to mimic the accusations you make against the BBC.

  31. miami.mode
    September 12, 2015

    Currently watching Last Night of the Proms and the singing of Rule Britannia. If we don’t get out of the EU we may have to consider changing the words.

  32. petermartin2001
    September 12, 2015

    Yes, we are better off out. Now that Jeremy Corbyn is officially Labour leader, wouldn’t it be better to try to encourage the Labour Left to rediscover more of their previous euroscepticism with an olive branch rather than engaging in open hostility? There’ll be plenty of time for that after the EU referendum and before the next election.

    Michael Foot was labelled a “left loony”, and all the rest of it , because he ran the 1983 election on a platform of ‘Brexit’. It was Margaret Thatcher, then, who ran on a pro-EU platform.

    So let’s not think the Tory right and UKIP have a monopoly on the anti-EU vote. All “leave” votes will count equally in the referendum whether they are cast by Labour, Tory, or UKIP supporters. No-one can afford to alienate anyone else right now. We’ll need every vote we can get.

    Reply Mr Corbyn has not pledged to campaign for Out or spoken of the need to restore UK democracy. All Labour voters are of course welcome in any such common cause.

  33. David Pearl
    September 13, 2015

    Good summary JR.

    The key thing is that you focused on positive reasons. For decades those in favour of leaving the EU have focused on all the negative aspects of being in the EU – the majority still do.

    Now that we’re going to have a referendum it’s vital that we present the electorate over and over again with all the positive reasons why the UK will be better off by leaving. How refreshing to read a respected MP sending out such positive messages.

    I think this must become an essential part of the strategy of the ‘Leave’ campaign.

    People will not vote for the unknown – it’s scary. We need to paint a wonderful picture for people. Something to lay out before them over many months, with a lot of repetition to drive it home, encompassing all aspects of what life would be like in an independent nation again.

    One of the biggest threats we face is fear of the future. Take away the fear and replace it with freedom, enthusiasm and greater prospects, and we’ll have a campaign that can win.

  34. Monty
    September 13, 2015

    While I take on board the comments about the positive potential of regaining our sovereignty, I still think it is vitally important to highlight the chaos and misery being inflicted upon ordinary people, by the posturing blowhards of Europe.
    Only on Friday we were being told that Germany stands ready to accept 800 000 “asylum seekers” (at the expense of their own poorest citizens who are being evicted from their social housing ) and demands a comparable quota system be imposed on the entire EU. The UK’s significant financial contribution to maintaining the refugees in situ was effectively rubbished, as was Cameron’s insistence that refugee processing should be concentrated in Syria to prevent needless attrition at sea. At the same time, the Hungarians were excoriated for following agreed EU procedures.
    Weekend’s not even over, and the Germans have closed their border, thus trapping the surge in Austria.
    Disgusting, disgraceful and disreputable.

  35. Ken Moore
    September 14, 2015

    Dr Redwood is now 9/10ths of the way towards admitting that Camerons re-negotiation policy is a hollow sham..a re-branding excercise. Progress.

    Reply Not so. I welcome a renegotiation and the referendum that follows, and have always said I think it is difficult to secure the fundamental change we want. If we don’t get it I will be campaigning for Leave. What is unclear about that consistent position?

    1. Ken Moore
      September 14, 2015

      Thanks Dr Redwood,

      It is not the clarity or consistency of your position..but the illogicality of potentially backing a re-negotiaton that cannot possibly work.

      Lack of democracy, high costs, open borders and loss of sovereignty are fundamental characteristics of the Eu. They are it’s building blocks and by their nature non-negotiable .. in the same way that it is in a dogs nature to wag it’s tail and occasionally bark at postmen. Neither can be re-negotiated.

      To us casual observers, Mr Cameron’s re-negotiation is a re-branding strategy that cannot possibly offer anything of real substance or real change. If the Conservative sceptics cannot admit now that the re-negotiation is a futile fig leaf gesture , the task of facing down the powerfull stay in lobby is made greater.

      reply I will continue to make the case for a self governing UK and will vote for that. Why can’t you understand that and support the way I am trying to do it instead of wrongly seeing me as part of the problem.

      1. Ken Moore
        September 16, 2015

        Thank you Dr Redwood,

        I support and appreciate your efforts to get us real change. There are precious few others that have worked as hard, and speak with your authority that are willing to stand up for England. Too many mps it seems appear to despise their own country or care only for career.

        However I fear a wait and see approach on Mr Cameron’s dangerous and deceitful re-negotiation strategy is a gift to the stay in lobby.

        Better to declare now that it is a policy that cannot possibly work (particularly when Mr Cameron won’t even ask for what we want).
        To not admit that now risks giving respectability to what is an exercise in political spin. Better to dismiss renegotiation now before it gains anymore traction.

        I fear Mr Cameron will by some sleight of hand, conjure up some sort of minor concession from our Euro partners that he will present as a great victory for the Uk. When in reality it amounts to next to nothing.

        Such a con trick might be enough to draw enough fire from the leave campaign to secure Mr Cameron’s wish for us to continue along the path set out for us to become a puppet of the Eu. This is the nightmare tha must be avoided.

Comments are closed.