Leaving the EU will be good for our trade

TRADE

Outside the EU the UK will have more scope to sell to the rest of the world, will be able to draw up its own free trade agreements with other countries, and will see its balance of payments deficit cut by the ending of EU contribution n payments.

The £10 billion the UK contributes to the EU every year which it does not get back is on fifth of the forecast balance of payments deficit for next year.Stopping those payments would be a great boost to our overseas account.

The UK needs free trade agreements with China, India and the USA, but has been prevented from having them through EU membership.

The UK will be able out of the EU to influence standards and rules governing goods and service sector trade, by regaining seats on international bodies the EU took from us.

The decision to leave will send a clear signal that the UK is dedicated to the wide world, not just relying on its adjacent continent.

We will be able to rebuild stronger trade and investment links with the Commonwealth and the English speaking world.

OUR OPPONENTS WILL CLAIM TRADE WILL BE DAMAGED AND THE UK WILL BE LIKE NORWAY

Our trade is not at risk. The German government has made clear they do not want to impose new tariffs or other barriers to trade if the UK leaves. After all, they sell us twice as much as we sell them, so new restraints would be damaging to Germany.

Our leading car makers Nissan, Toyota and Jaguar Land Rover have all said they will invest in new models and remain committed to the UK whether we are in or out.

The UK will not do a deal like Norway. When you run as large a deficit as we do with the rest of the EU there is no need to pay anything into the EU to keep the trade going.

Nor will the UK be on the wrong end of fax rules and regulations. The UK will return to making our own rules and regulations, and to having more influence on world standards.

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

98 Comments

  1. Lifelogic
    Posted January 26, 2016 at 5:53 am | Permalink

    Indeed it will be very good for trade. The ability to move towards cheaper energy, having fewer daft regulations, easier employments laws and lower taxes would also make the UK far more competitive. Assuming that is we can get a sensible government that actually does deliver this for a change. One that delivers a bonfire of red tape, cuts out the huge government waste and really is “low tax conservative at heart”. Rather than one that is all lies, serial ratting, hot air and PR spin.

    I heard Osborne again yesterday saying “the UK has low taxes” clearly he is lying or he has simply not understood his own hugely tax grabbing budgets. The many attacks on pensions, the ratting on the IHT promise, the removal of child benefit and tax allowances (for many), the 45% rate, the low level of the 40% threshold, the increases in IPT, the absurd stamp duty and CGT (without even indexing) levels, the new dividend tax, the enveloped dwelling tax, the landlord/tenant thefts, plus the huge deficit (that is in essence deferred tax on top). Despite this we still have dreadful public services, an absurdly structured and rationed/delayed NHS and HMRC that cannot even answer the phone. The tax complexity is as harmful as the high levels of tax too. It wastes lots of peoples time when they could be doing something useful and productive instead.

    I see Sir Stuart Rose seems to think the UK will not be able to be limit or be selective immigration post Brexit – when asked why he was totally unable to answer the question so he just changed the topic and moved on to some other vague pro EU drivel.

    Reply Mr Osborne was talking about corporate taxes where he has cut the rate substantially

    • Lifelogic
      Posted January 26, 2016 at 1:30 pm | Permalink

      Well the cut in corporation taxes is not that large and hugely outweighed by all the other increases. Furthermore when his damaging higher wages by decree (and the work place pensions) come in many companies will not be making any profits to be taxed at this slightly lower rate. The rate for small companies has not reduced (20%) and the large company rate is now the same (20%) having come down a mere 4%. The new dividend tax more than wipes any gains out for most shareholders if the company is making distributions.

      Do politicians like Osborne and Cameron go on courses to learn how to lie so blatantly, while keeping a straight face or are they just naturals?

      What he actually said was “he wanted the message to go out that UK has low taxes”. How can it with his endless tax increasing actions? The UK does not have low taxes at all, it has very high taxes, they are increasing and still they do not raise enough to pay for all this wasteful government. Furthermore this is largely because he personally has put them up massively. He also refuses to cut out the endless waste and still the state sector still delivers generally dreadful and deteriorating “public services” too.

      About the only thing they seem to be quite efficient at is issuing parking tickets and bus lane fines and other such muggings.

    • Qubus
      Posted January 26, 2016 at 2:20 pm | Permalink

      Apparently Sir Stuart doesn’t even seem to know the name of the organisation that he is representing (vide this morning’s DT). If that is the best that they can come up with, then we are in with a chance.

    • Anonymous
      Posted January 26, 2016 at 6:23 pm | Permalink

      Stuart Rose is right about immigration continuing post Brexit. Though he is wrong to say that we can’t control immigration. We can but the Government has proved that it doesn’t want to.

      • Lifelogic
        Posted January 26, 2016 at 8:02 pm | Permalink

        Surely the best solution is quality immigration (people who pay for themselves) and far less low quality immigration.

        Not that I would want to be considered too judgemental.

        Well actually I do not give a damn if I am not PC.

  2. DaveM
    Posted January 26, 2016 at 6:24 am | Permalink

    “OUR OPPONENTS WILL CLAIM TRADE WILL BE DAMAGED AND THE UK WILL BE LIKE NORWAY”

    What, the richest country in the world?!!!

    • Lifelogic
      Posted January 26, 2016 at 2:58 pm | Permalink

      Exactly or the rather rich Switzerland. In fact we will be better of than both as we are larger and have sea borders. Especially if we deregulate, lower taxes, introduce easy hire and fire and go for cheap energy instead of the green crap. Also we could sort out all the daft subsidies for farming and green crap that do so much harm and misdirect activity so much.

      Some dope on the BBC radio 4 was being told (by the out side) that the EU exported more to the UK than we did to the EU. The interviewer (in BBC think mode” then went on about the ratio it being only 10% or something of EU output compared to 40%? of the UKs. What a halfwitted and bogus line of argument. What on earth does the % of their trade matter it is the total size of the trade that counts and the fact they we have a net trade deficit.

      • Lifelogic
        Posted January 26, 2016 at 2:59 pm | Permalink

        Anyway if we vote out we will only get offered a second better deal so even the IN people should vote OUT.

      • Know-Dice
        Posted January 26, 2016 at 4:02 pm | Permalink

        Those were the figures Peter Hain trotted out on Question Time last week – the blind following the disingenuous…

        • Lifelogic
          Posted January 26, 2016 at 8:29 pm | Permalink

          Exactly.

    • bigneil
      Posted January 26, 2016 at 4:14 pm | Permalink

      Be like Norway? – the country that was reported as going to be deporting 5500 people by bus back into Russia, whereas WE have to spend God knows how much to go through a court case – with US paying for everything – for each person. Is our country the only one which rewards foreign rapists murderers and paedophiles, allowing them ( on claim of persecution for their crimes if deported) to stay here with everything provided on the taxpayer? Unemployable, a financial burden for life – and a danger to US. But still they are allowed to be here. Clearly our so-called elite hate us.

  3. Mark B
    Posted January 26, 2016 at 6:43 am | Permalink

    Good morning.

    It is not just the so called, ‘contributions’ that the UK has to pay. What about the £1.5 billion pounds we had to give the EU in taxes just for the termerity of being successful.

    The EU is about wealth transfer. It is Socialist in construct and is getting worse with potentially more mouths to feed in the form of Turkey, Ukraine and the other Balkan states.

    Things for the EU are going to get worse, not better. The whole project, much like the Communist Project, was born of a time long ago. It bears no resemblance to the real world and must, like Communism, be consigned to the dustbin of history.

    • Mitchel
      Posted January 26, 2016 at 1:35 pm | Permalink

      @Mark B.It’s a totalitarian project;whether it ends up as a socialist or corporatist dystopia remains to be seen/fought over.

      There is a fascinating novel,We, by Evgeny Zamyatin which is not well known in this country but is considered to be the inspiration behind both Huxley’s Brave New World and Orwell’s 1984.Zamyatin had been an early bolshevik revolutionary but very quickly saw it was turning into a nightmare and wrote this novel (c1920 although inevitably not published in Russia till the 1980s) as a riposte to H G Wells socialist,scientific utopianist writings(which he had translated into Russian)as refracted by his own experiences of the dehumanizing aspects of the bolshevik regime.So much of his vision is either being realised or has echoes in our current experiences.I think it would appeal to many readers of this blog!

      • hefner
        Posted January 27, 2016 at 8:11 am | Permalink

        Thanks for the advice.

    • fedupsoutherner
      Posted January 26, 2016 at 2:36 pm | Permalink

      What about the billions handed over to Turkey to improve border controls which hasn’t taken place? Some of this is our money!! They must be loving it together with the promise of early entry into the EU.

  4. Samuel
    Posted January 26, 2016 at 7:03 am | Permalink

    Another good read. I wish so many of our national discussions were as straight talking and to the point as this. Don’t always agree with everything you post but I do respect the candidness by which you approach subjects. Insightful, thought-provoking and meaningful to the debate.

    Sam
    (Scottish Nationalist!)

    Reply Thank you. As you know, I believe in independent democratic countries making their own decisions, and only want a Union of the willing.

  5. Mike Stallard
    Posted January 26, 2016 at 7:17 am | Permalink

    Excellent article – again!

    The real problem, of course, is the negotiations. With Switzerland it took some 16 years to get anything arranged and then it was very much tilted in favour of the EU.
    We need an off the peg interim measure so that our present trading links with Europe are not interrupted and so that there is a time limit to the negotiations imposed.
    How?
    EEA and EFTA membership will provide the former – temporarily not permanently.
    Applying Article 50 (which may well be Article 138 under the Fundamental Law) will provide the latter (2 year limit).

    If we do not provide both of these, then the negotiations will drag on and on and our referendum will have been hijacked.

  6. Richard Jenkins
    Posted January 26, 2016 at 7:27 am | Permalink

    Enough with this this nonsense about the UK being like Norway. The UK can negotiate its own trade agreement with the EU, as Canada has already done, and as Auatralia is currently doing, based on its existing trade framework. Since Cameron owes his election victory to an Australian adviser, perhaps he should hire an Australian trade negotiator.

  7. Margaret
    Posted January 26, 2016 at 7:31 am | Permalink

    As soon as we are out I will by a new Toyota.

    • Margaret
      Posted January 26, 2016 at 3:16 pm | Permalink

      Buy; silly key board

  8. Anonymous
    Posted January 26, 2016 at 7:31 am | Permalink

    “YOU WILL LOSE £3000 !!!” They squealed on TV yesterday.

    There is no limit to the scaremongering and muck-racking that the Ins are allowed to use. The Outs are forced to fight with one hand tied behind their backs.

    The very reasonable arguments about the costs of mass immigration have been tainted and it wasn’t Nigel Farage who tainted them – but it was he who tested the extent to which they had been tainted.

    Now few will dare.

    It could have been different, if the rest on the Right had not hung back like Robert the Bruce when the time came to rout the Left to win back free speech in this country.

  9. Antisthenes
    Posted January 26, 2016 at 7:33 am | Permalink

    What you are advocating is a complete and total break from the EU. Something that most are not suggesting or contemplating. That idea I believe will not encourage enough voters to win the referendum for the leavers. Although to my mind your idea has considerable merit and is the best solution. Complete independence would be best as that would give the UK the greatest advantage to trade world wide including with the EU and take it’s rightful place on the world political stage.

    The UK has one of the worlds largest economies and the power that gives is now being usurped by the EU for it’s own nefarious purposes with very little benefit emanating back to the UK. That should not be allowed to persist the people of the UK should have their power and influence back and use it to benefit the people of the UK primarily. Who else benefits from it should be those who the UK people decide it should be not the technocrats in Brussels.

    Unfortunately I do not foresee in the event of leave winning the referendum that your idea will be adopted. Instead I suspect something like the Norway option will be but at least that will be considerably better than the current arrangement. Perhaps complete independence can be achieved later. As I do not believe that the EU is sustainable as it’s so many crises keep reminding us and one day there will be one crisis too many and the whole thing will fall apart. In that event the UK needs to be as far detached from it as possible so as to not be taken down with it.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted January 26, 2016 at 3:18 pm | Permalink

      We have to win the referendum, and we should not allow the best to become the enemy of the good. If we did move into a similar position to Norway at least we would be heading in the right direction, and it need not be the end of the process.

  10. Ex-expat Colin
    Posted January 26, 2016 at 7:52 am | Permalink

    Don’t need stuff from Europe that we can easily get elsewhere to our requirements and cheaper?
    Don’t need stuff from the Far East or elsewhere via the EU unless cheaper.
    If anybody wants to setup here…they can.
    If anybody wishes to trade with the EU…they can.

    Don’t ever want to see this country on dependencies ever again.

    Give notice and Go!

  11. matthu
    Posted January 26, 2016 at 7:55 am | Permalink

    John

    How can you be absolutely sure that a unanimous deal, agreed by all EU members, will be reached within the maximum allotted two year period?

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted January 26, 2016 at 3:13 pm | Permalink

      That two year period can be extended with the consent of both parties.

  12. Know-Dice
    Posted January 26, 2016 at 8:14 am | Permalink

    From the BBC yesterday:

    “Civitas studied official trade statistics and said that Britain had recorded slower export growth than any of the other founding nations of Europe’s single market.

    Michael Burrage, who wrote the report, said: “While the single market cannot be counted a success in export terms for the EU as a whole, for the UK it must be counted at the very least a massive disappointment, and not far short of a disaster.”

    His report found growth in UK exports had tended to drop after European Commission trade deals, whereas independent countries Switzerland, Singapore and South Korea increased exports in the majority of cases after they negotiated their own trade agreements.

    Mr Burrage added that UK export growth was 22.3% lower since joining the single market at the end of 1992 than it would have been had it continued at its rate during the common market between 1973 and 1992.

    Vote Leave chief executive Matthew Elliott said: “The unquestioning mantra that the single market has been good for British trade is wrong and should be challenged as this research makes crystal clear.”

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-35394839

    • Qubus
      Posted January 26, 2016 at 2:41 pm | Permalink

      This seemed to me to be a very fair interview; none of the usual bias.

    • Qubus
      Posted January 26, 2016 at 2:54 pm | Permalink

      After reading you comments, I listened to the section of the Today program via the link that you provided. As I wrote, it seemed to me to be a very fair interview of Sir Stuart Rose.
      However, when decided to go to the BBC website and scanned through this morning’s Today programme (26/01/2016) I could find no trace of the interview, although there was, I think, an interview with one of the UKIP politicians.

      Something odd here!

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted January 26, 2016 at 3:11 pm | Permalink

      The economic significance of the Single Market is routinely and greatly exaggerated, as Matthew Elliott says it is just an “unquestioning mantra”. If we completely left the Single Market then, yes, that would be damaging for our economy, but only on a small scale and the loss of GDP would be quickly recouped through natural growth. On the other hand, considering popular perception as shaped by the political establishment and the mass media, rather than the reality, and bearing in mind that if there was any prospect of job losses then many people would wonder whether their own job would be among those lost and cast their votes to minimise that risk, it will obviously be a lot easier to win the referendum if we ourselves accept, and we can convince the voters, that when we leave the EU we will still have access the same access to the Single Market by one route or another, and even if that is still accompanied by some disadvantages.

    • Qubus
      Posted January 26, 2016 at 3:24 pm | Permalink

      Some confusion here: the interview accessed via the link gives an interview of Sir Stuart Rose by Justin Webb on the Today programme on 25/01/2016 and is of duration about 3 minutes. However, if you go to the BBC website and listen directly (this is about 2hrs, 10 min into the programme) the interview lasts about 11 minutes. Admittedly, the interviewee had pretty much uninterrupted flow for a lot of the time, but he was challenged quite strongly a number of times by Justin Webb.
      I can’t fault the BBC too much here.

  13. nigel
    Posted January 26, 2016 at 8:29 am | Permalink

    JR: All good stuff. I think it would be helpful for many of us, if you could lay out an approximate timetable of what would happen if we vote to leave the EU. How long would the exit process take? At what stage would we start to negotiate new trade agreements with the EU, and how long should this take? At what stage do farming and other subsidies phased out, and replaced by some sort of equivalent from the UK Government?
    Both sides are making lots of broad statements, and I think that if voters could see some detail, they would be less fearful.

  14. alan jutson
    Posted January 26, 2016 at 8:31 am | Permalink

    Thank you for this mini post series of reasons to leave the EU.

    Whilst many regulars to your site are well acquainted with the reasons, those who are new readers or who want to know more actual facts, I am sure will find these simple buttery important postings helpful.

    I hope it gains more traction from other media sources and eventually gains your site more readership.

    Keep up the good work and pressure John.

    • alan jutson
      Posted January 26, 2016 at 8:43 am | Permalink

      ” Leaving the Eu will be good for Trade.”

      Yes it will, as long as Mr Cameron and his sidekicks are not involved in any of the negotiations.

      Reason:
      He is an absolutely hopeless negotiator, and would still be offering them our money in some way shape or form to continue to trade with them.

      Just look at the absolutely pathetic requests he has made so far, when we should have had a hugely positive and strong negotiation position.
      Just look at his record for employing the wrong sort of people to be on his personal staff.
      Just look at his negotiations with Nick Clegg on the Coalition, and giving them a huge slice of power.

      If we do vote to leave, then we need people with real commercial experience to negotiate on our behalf any trade deals that need to be completed.

      • Lifelogic
        Posted January 27, 2016 at 3:38 am | Permalink

        Cameron does seem to be a rather disaster when selecting people to promote. What sensible person would a want Soubry, Rudd, Warsi, Huhne, Davey, Clegg, Truss. Goldsmith ….. controlling anything significant?

    • alan jutson
      Posted January 26, 2016 at 8:45 am | Permalink

      Oops

      “buttery” should be but, predictive text strikes again.

  15. They Work for Us?
    Posted January 26, 2016 at 8:45 am | Permalink

    Trade and leaving the EU was “covered” in a disgraceful manner on the “Today” Programme, this morning. Justin Webb Radio 4, was determined to talk over and harass the person being interviewed and seemed to speak much longer than they did.
    He seemed to be determined to restrict the discussion to Trade only, no mention of Sovereignty really. Justin Webb seemed to be peddling new canards in attempting to link “Savings” by not being in the EU with cuts and austerity by stealth to remove EU money from deserving bodies. Less time was granted to this interview than to Lord Rose yesterday and the time slot was less prominent. The programme spent much more time talking about a museum display put together by an obscure Turkish author and the discovery of a new Beatrix Potter story.
    It is time an interviewee was not overawed by the likes of Justin Webb and said “Why do keep talking over me, please state the BBC editorial line so you can get over it and we can move on to a proper interview and discussion.

    • Mitchel
      Posted January 26, 2016 at 1:52 pm | Permalink

      And no coverage from the BBC TV news this morning on the murder of a Swedish female worker at a refuge centre for asylum seekers or the report that Swedish police are now being totally overwhelmed by problems connected with immigration.Both were headline news on RT;the BBC obviously thought we’d be better off knowing about the lost Beatrix Potter story that has turned up.

      • DaveM
        Posted January 26, 2016 at 4:05 pm | Permalink

        The BBC seem to live in a different world sometimes, imagining people only get news from them. Although it may not have been on the TV News, it was on the website, and – funny old thing – was the most read story all day.

        Having kids of a certain age, I know that most young and youngish people (who care about current affairs) generally get all their news from papers or from direct feeds from journalists to various social media outlets.

        The last GE showed that blatant BBC bias doesn’t often work.

      • Bob
        Posted January 26, 2016 at 10:03 pm | Permalink

        The BBC ought to be renamed “The Ministry of Truth”.

        By the way, you don’t need a TV Licence if you use a Smart TV and use streaming. Starve the beast.

    • Qubus
      Posted January 26, 2016 at 2:30 pm | Permalink

      The interviewer on this lunchtime’s Daily Politics (BBC2 @12.00am) even suggested that, were to leave the EU, we should have great problems because the remainder of the EU would be very angry with us and therefore not agree to any reasonable post-membership deals.
      I am pleased to say that Norman Lamont hit that one for six.

      • A.Sedgwick
        Posted January 26, 2016 at 5:06 pm | Permalink

        Although he was firmly sitting on the fence about his voting intention – disappointing given the ERM trauma he went through.

  16. agricola
    Posted January 26, 2016 at 8:46 am | Permalink

    The EU is a protectionist cartel, run for the benefit of large corporations who are big enough to set the rules. Hence their enthusiasm and that of the CBI for being in the EU. Generally it is of negative benefit to the consumers within it, cut off from World food prices by the CAP.

    The CAP is a protectionist racket mostly designed to shield small, not very efficient French farmers from the reality of the market place. Great though many of their cheeses are they should not be subsidised. Beyond shrink wrapped Cheddar there is little evidence in Europe of the fantastic range of UK cheese. Our gain is their loss.

    The CAP prevents us buying food at World market prices in our supermarkets. We should be free to buy food wherever we wish in the World to the benefit in particular of our Commonwealth partners.

    The EU is the only market where you have to pay a fee to trade. I equate it with the bribery that is necessary to trade in other parts of the World. The sooner we are out of it the better.

    Thinking in terms of engineering goods the EU is no different in principal from any other market in the World. All countries have their own idea of what an electric plug is. If we want to sell plugs to a specific country we manufacture to the specification they demand. Such is the way of trade, wake up to it and enjoy the profit. We do not have to pay an EU membership fee for the privilege of selling them plugs. No one else outside their cartel does this.

    At present the EU is a supplicant at WTO meetings that decide how World trade is run. We the UK have at best a one in twenty eight say in the EU’s case. Bizarre as one of the top trading nations in the World. Outside the EU we would make our own submissions to the WTO. The case for being free of the EU is a no brainer.

    • graham1946
      Posted January 26, 2016 at 11:12 am | Permalink

      Yes, all true. Just shows what a low level politicians we had and have still who arranged it and continue to argue that it is a good deal. Why the Conservatives of all people, from Heath onwards thought then and continue to argue that to join a socialist construct was a good idea, I cannot fathom. Was there ever a real Tory party? They seem scared of standing on their own feet and need a nanny.

      Re your last para, ‘out’ may be a ‘no brainer’ but unfortunately a lot of ‘no brainers’ including sycophantic Tory politcians will have a vote.

    • getahead
      Posted January 26, 2016 at 2:10 pm | Permalink

      “The EU is a protectionist cartel, run for the benefit of large corporations who are big enough to set the rules.”
      But exactly how do they benefit? Clearly they do, otherwise we wouldn’t have the likes of Stuart Rose telling his porkie pies to frighten us into staying.
      I would like it spelled out by someone what form the corporate benefits take.
      John?

      • agricola
        Posted January 26, 2016 at 8:12 pm | Permalink

        I suspect that their most negative activity is making it very difficult for innovative small and medium businesses to enter their business space and compete.

      • Fairweather
        Posted January 26, 2016 at 8:51 pm | Permalink

        Large corporations benefit from the eu because they can lobby for things in their interests and by doing so this has a negative effect on small traders.eg big pharma firms lobbied for vitamins and homeopathic medicines to need clinical trials. This is why a lot of stuff has vanished from the market and probably put some firms out of business. Large car manufacturers are doing the same things with spares. Soon only main agents will be able to service cars etc.etc

      • Lifelogic
        Posted January 27, 2016 at 3:45 am | Permalink

        It does not seem to have benefited that shareholders at M&S over the last ten years or so. The share price performance is dire.

  17. David
    Posted January 26, 2016 at 8:52 am | Permalink

    ” The German government has made clear they do not want to impose new tariffs or other barriers to trade if the UK leaves. After all, they sell us twice as much as we sell them, so new restraints would be damaging to Germany.”
    Good news and not unexpected. Do you have a reference for that?

  18. oldtimer
    Posted January 26, 2016 at 8:53 am | Permalink

    Another very clear analysis of the situation, with which I agree.

    I read there was an event, yesterday, to game the negotiations that might take place between the EU and the UK in the event of a vote to Leave. I did not follow it nor have I yet seen any reports about it. No doubt it, or key extracts, will appear on YouTube eventually. If or when you have had the opportunity to absorb what transpired, it would be helpful to have your comments on it. I believe it was organised by a supporter of the Remain campaign.

    • alan jutson
      Posted January 26, 2016 at 5:57 pm | Permalink

      Oldtimer

      They showed a bit of this on Daily Politics today.

      Absolute fiction by both sides using past politicians

      Norman Lamont offering to pay the EU so we could sell them Goods. he thought this a sensible solution to his leaving. !
      That is why I want only politicians with some hard nosed commercial business knowledge to act on our behalf in any negotiations.

      What a plonker, just like a Cameron solution would look like.

      Politicians don’t you just love them, playing at negotiations when nothing is at stake is play acting, and means absolutely zero in the real World.

    • Fairweather
      Posted January 26, 2016 at 8:56 pm | Permalink

      This was a meeting organised by “open Europe” widely shown on the media yesterday and today
      You can see the whole thing on their yesterday’s report
      Very boring

  19. stred
    Posted January 26, 2016 at 9:13 am | Permalink

    Re the wrong side of tax? rules and regulations, today my journey around the south side of the M25 is again blocked by a 10 mile jam because of a broken down motor bike. Is there any other country in Europe, or the World, where a 4 lane motorway witha side strip as wide as a motorbike and a large grassed border would stop all traffic waiting for a rescue van and government officials in a huge Japanese Range Rover cone off 2 lanes, creating a 40 minute delay for thousands of vehicles and lost man hours. Answer no. It is home grown in Whitehall.

    • miami.mode
      Posted January 26, 2016 at 4:28 pm | Permalink

      Sorry to argue against you stred, but without a proper full width hard shoulder it strikes me as dangerous because you will only need a vehicle to veer slightly off course, hit the bike and cause a serious crash.

      If you have ever had to stand on or close to a motorway with traffic racing past at 70 mph you would realise how terrifying it can be.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted January 27, 2016 at 3:47 am | Permalink

      I had exactly the same thing a few weeks back. Delayed for over two hours due to a small car fire. Get some more road space and clear the roads more quickly when anything happens. The cost of all those delays is huge alas it does not fall on the government just those trying to earn a living.

  20. Shieldsman
    Posted January 26, 2016 at 9:17 am | Permalink

    I agree wholeheartedly with your views on the benefits of leaving the EU.
    Our method of exit could be by article 50, which talks of a negotiated withdrawal from the Treaties (Lisbon).
    You have covered the aspect of continuing to trade with the EU. Remaining in EFTA does not appear to require freedom of movement (residence) of its member states citizens. Can you clarify this point.

    Eric Pickles: “So if David Cameron comes back with that decent deal he has set out to get, I’m going to be campaigning to remain in a reformed Europe”.
    I keep looking at Mr Cameron’s letter to Donald Tusk and wondering what the shape of Cameron’s reformed Europe (EU) will look like? How will it rectify all the faults he has been enumerating in speech and writing for the past three years.
    He did write – the EU is not working and we will change it.
    As they say it takes two to tango.

  21. Denis Cooper
    Posted January 26, 2016 at 9:38 am | Permalink

    “The German government has made clear they do not want to impose new tariffs or other barriers to trade if the UK leaves.”

    I think we need a source for that claim, JR, as it is bound to be challenged.

    I think we can assume that if the German government wants trade to continue unimpeded then that is what will happen, whatever the technicalities of a new treaty.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted January 26, 2016 at 1:11 pm | Permalink

      I’m hoping that you will be able to supply a source to which we can refer.

      Meanwhile, at the Open Europe exercise yesterday:

      http://openeurope.org.uk/daily-shakeup/eu-wargames-eu-migration-and-striking-a-deal-on-services-most-contentious-points-in-post-brexit-world/

      “Leading the Brexit talks, which started on the assumption that the UK public had voted to leave in the referendum, former Chancellor Lord Norman Lamont sought to strike a comprehensive free trade deal with the EU broadly similar to CETA (the EU’s free trade deal with Canada). While European players warned that this would not be a priority in a post-Brexit world, former EU Trade Commissioner, Karel de Gucht, playing the role of the EU institutions, disagreed, saying that a new trade deal with the UK would become the EU’s “top political priority.” John Bruton, the former Irish Taoiseach, whose country stands to lose a significant proportion of its GDP if there’s a Brexit, said, “I would regard it as an unfriendly act: a huge self-imposed, politically generated shock to our economy.” Striking a deal on services, and particularly gaining market access for financial services – a key national interest for the UK – proved to be amongst the contentious UK requests, with the former French Europe Minister, Noëlle Lenoir, and Former Deputy Finance Minister of Germany Steffen Kampeter, warning that the EU would seek to move its financial centre to Frankfurt, or elsewhere within the bloc. Lord Lamont retorted that, ultimately, “it’s not people behind desks” but market forces that will decide where business goes.”

      Well, unless some of those campaigning to keep us in the EU are actually right and the governments of the other EU countries would choose to behave in a stupid and vindictive way, rather than allowing common sense and financial self-interest to prevail, then of course “a new trade deal with the UK would become the EU’s “top political priority.””.
      Reply I was assured in my meeting with a senior representative of the German government they have no wish to impose new tariffs or barriers on our mutual trade. The German Finance Minister has also said in the past that they want to continue their good trade with the UK.
      I do not agree with Norman Lamont offering any Uk contribution to the EU. There is no need to, and over 160 other countries in the world trade with the EU without paying for the privilege.

  22. a-tracy
    Posted January 26, 2016 at 9:50 am | Permalink

    Wargames session!: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jan/25/uk-should-be-punished-if-it-leaves-european-union-to-deter-other-exits

    So Britain will be at war if we choose to leave (Brexit), used as an example to others! This shows how much Europe has never understood our Country, threaten us, try to derail and destabilise us and we fight back instead of capitulating. I’m still on the fence over this exit, but this sort of article and talk just makes me want to leave – we’ll move the financial centre of Europe – well what are they promising instead to confirm London as the financial centre of Europe once and for all, lets face it France, Germany and Belgium signed off the big institutions for themselves at great expense moving the parliament regularly. They have been quite open about their success so far at divide and conquer with Scotland their new best hope to teach us a lesson to persuade Scotland to remain in Europe. It’s all very threatening. No promises like those Brown rushed in to Scotland to persuade them to stay in the UK, we get the opposite treatment.

    John, you need to have answers to these threats, there is even talk about our UK emigrants suddenly not being welcome in Europe – really how is this going to work? Every rule they impose against us we impose against them? This doesn’t make me fearful it makes me resolute, we need to know what we will do if we get ‘punished’, where will we get our current imports from, can we set up import arrangements with others and make more ourselves? We need to enter negotiations from a position of strength not kowtowing.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted January 26, 2016 at 12:54 pm | Permalink

      I think we would do well to read the first paragraph of the American Declaration of Independence, and try to proceed with the same kind of caution for how the world at large will see what we are doing, because afterwards we will need a sympathetic hearing from the governments of the other independent sovereign states.

      “When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.”

      But maybe we should even now play that back to Obama?

    • DaveM
      Posted January 26, 2016 at 6:05 pm | Permalink

      I read that article (and a couple of others which are linked from it at the bottom) before I read your comment, and my sentiments – probably along with millions of others – were pretty much the same as yours, ie., how bloody dare you threaten me with your pathetic demands for what you think my country should do? Who the hell do you think you are, getting rich off us, expecting us to bail you out, then thinking our military is yours, and our land is somewhere to spread out the migrant crisis you’ve created?

      The more of this kind of behaviour we see from the EUcrats the better, IMO. The UK should be punished? Good luck with that you foolish, suited, idiots. We’ve dealt with a lot worse. You’ll lure Scotland away to the EU? Fair enough, you can pay for their socialist overspending. Take Wales too if you like.

      Only problem is, Cameron’s more likely to start crying and asking when his EU masters think he should hold the referendum. Not that it matters – what do they think we are? Goldfish? I don’t think the last couple of years are going to be forgotten about in a hurry; why do they think the migrant crisis is suddenly going to get better? The more that come the more problems there will be.

      I’m OUT at ANY cost Qubus, but I want to reach out to our German, Swedish, French, etc neighbours and help them at the minute. They’re being royally shafted by their political class, and they deserve better. A union of ordinary Europeans would be great; the EU, though, stinks to high heaven.

      • DaveM
        Posted January 26, 2016 at 6:23 pm | Permalink

        a-Tracy, sorry, not Qubus.

    • Chris
      Posted January 26, 2016 at 10:23 pm | Permalink

      I tried to reply to you a’tracy but for some reason my comment did not make it. What I highlighted was that Articles 50, 3.5, 8, 21.2 of the Treaty of the European Union make quite clear that any fear stories of “punishment beatings” as hinted at by some europhile fearmongers are not justified. I gave the link to the blogger who has written in detail on this and sadly it has been disallowed. Not a helpful move, as we all need to be as informed as possible in this debate. Furthermore, such apparent blocking of key information about the workings of the Treaty can turn out to be counterproductive

  23. Mockbeggar
    Posted January 26, 2016 at 9:57 am | Permalink

    Interesting that yesterday Radio 4 Today gave the prime interview spot (8.10 am) to Stuart Rose and key soundbites were included in the news headlines at 8.30 and, I think, again at 9.00. Mention was made that there would be an interview with someone (name not given) giving the opposite point of view this morning. I tuned in at 8.00 am to find that there was no interview on the topic at 8.10 and the website tells me it was at 7.50 (so about 5 minutes rather than Rose’s 10) with John Moynihan. No mention of it was made in the news or the news summary at either 8.30 or 9.00.

    Should I be surprised?

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted January 26, 2016 at 2:50 pm | Permalink

      He didn’t even know the name of the campaign he is leading!

  24. CHRISTOPHER HOUSTON
    Posted January 26, 2016 at 10:06 am | Permalink

    Russia most assuredly features on the hit list of countries the UK and EU lack sufficient wit in having meaningful dialogue. This feeds through immediately of course to the Eurasian Economic Union ( 183 million people ) to Iran ( 77 million ), Syria ( 22 million, incl the 10,000 ISIL terrorists ) and the BRICS group ( 3 Billion people…42% of the world population…).

    The EU, to date, has a self-destructive policy and world-view. Any nation other than an EU member when managing to produce goods at a fraction of the cost of one or all of its members due to low labour costs and cheap raw materials which of course is the modus operandi of the vast majority of poor countries is almost automatically assumed to be “dumping” the resultant goods on EU markets.
    In other words, a non-EU country with low wages and production costs across the board and with domestic access to cheap raw materials is automatically a wolf at the EU door if its production is mass produced and exported.
    The UK might take a first step in confounding the EU’s economic protectionism which springs from historic company mismanagement/nepotism/ cronyism and overestimation of its size and future position in the world by leaving.
    The second step or maybe also the first step should be to think around the prospect, on a theoretical basis, of whether a very physically powerful murderer, with infinite amounts and variety of armaments, with an intelligence and strategy of a chess Grandmaster would not to cover his tracks in murdering a victim by employing any number of unaware intermediaries say a drug-addict mugger who might commit the murder, seize a wallet and cash cards and leave quite accidentally a whiff of cocaine. Well something that stinks anyway.

  25. Atlas
    Posted January 26, 2016 at 10:32 am | Permalink

    John,

    Agreed – your argument is well put.

  26. Vanessa
    Posted January 26, 2016 at 10:49 am | Permalink

    Like Norway….. Yes please ! This is one of the richest countries, it is still sovereign, can control its borders and its seas. Its fishing industry is healthy. Its government is accountable to its people – do we remember what that was like ?

    WHAT IS NOT TO LIKE ?

    Why do politicians keep saying how we will be like Norway as a criticism – Norway is brilliant.

  27. Colin Hart
    Posted January 26, 2016 at 11:07 am | Permalink

    What do we have to do to get ourselves expelled?

    • DaveM
      Posted January 26, 2016 at 3:55 pm | Permalink

      Brilliant. That made me laugh out loud.

      Although thinking about it, and considering the tolerance shown to various groups of people in Germany, Sweden and Austria, I reckon we’d have to drop a nuke on Berlin to get expelled, so desperate are they to keep flogging this dead horse.

    • DaveM
      Posted January 26, 2016 at 4:09 pm | Permalink

      Also, to use the divorce analogy which is often used when talking about Brexit, has anyone considered a trial separation? Not for long – maybe 30 years or so.

  28. Kenneth
    Posted January 26, 2016 at 11:37 am | Permalink

    On Sunday night the BBC broadcast a programme, “In Business” (9:30pm, 24th January 2016), where the reporter travelled to Norway to get some insight of how things would be if the UK “followed the Norwegian model” with regards to its relationship with the eu.

    Considering the very high costs of travel and accommodation this was a gross waste of our money.

    I don’t know anybody who is seriously advocating us following the Norwegian model.

    The report did concede at one point that “the UK MIGHT be able to negotiate a better deal than Norway gets”.

    Might? This shows how illiterate the BBC is when it comes to trade. Has the BBC not looked at the value and volume of goods we import from eu states? It also shows how generous it is with our money, paying for a jolly to Norway, based on a false premise.

    Eu states would not dare to try this with us. A trade war between the UK and eu member states would be disastrous for them and they know it. All they can hope for is that the UK does not try to make then pay us for the privilege of trading with them and that they do not receive too many faxes advising them of our changes to product regulations.

    The BBC needs to sort itself out and look at how much of our money it is wasting of faulty political propaganda.

    Reply I agree. The Leave campaign has made quite clear we will not do a Norway.

  29. Bryan Harris
    Posted January 26, 2016 at 1:45 pm | Permalink

    John,

    Of course we agree with you – we can only be better off outside this confounded club.

    One concern I have is that if DC is still PM, I fear he will do all in his power to delay the exit, mismanage it, execute it on bad terms for us, or simply deny the fact that we voted to leave and carry on as normal.

    We should insist on a temporary PM to negotiate our exit.

    • turbo terrier
      Posted January 26, 2016 at 7:30 pm | Permalink

      Bryan Harris

      We should insist on a temporary PM to negotiate our exit

      What is with the word temporary? We need a totally different PM.

      Sadly for the country it is too late in the day as regards the European referendum

  30. lojolondon
    Posted January 26, 2016 at 3:46 pm | Permalink

    Hi John, I wonder if you are aware that the EU regulations have forced the end of Land Rover Defender production? Another example of sweeping EU regulations damaging British business.

    • bigneil
      Posted January 26, 2016 at 4:26 pm | Permalink

      And are you aware that all cars sold in the EU will shortly have to have a system that tracks everywhere a vehicle goes – being marketed as something like “emergency assist” which automatically calls emergency services if it registers an impact. Presumably the car will be set up that they will not run if the system is disconnected. With constant satellite monitoring comes automatic speed tickets from space.

      • Jerry
        Posted January 26, 2016 at 5:52 pm | Permalink

        @lojolondon; “EU regulations [has] forced the end of Land Rover Defender production”

        Did it or was it just a tied (basically unchanged) 65+ year old design, due for up dating, it happens to all vehicles eventually.

        @bigniel; “With constant satellite monitoring comes automatic speed tickets from space.”

        Only if the driver exceeds the speed limit though!…

  31. bigneil
    Posted January 26, 2016 at 4:21 pm | Permalink

    If the men who run “big business” want an endless supply of cheap 3rd world labour, why don’t they build their factories in 3rd world countries? Less regulation. No min wage. No H&S.

    • Jerry
      Posted January 26, 2016 at 5:40 pm | Permalink

      @bigniel; It is not “big business” who want an endless supply of cheap 3rd world labour, nor do they necessarily want to build factories (or contract-out to such factories), they need to do all of the above and more to remain competitive because the average Man, Woman and child -if not also their dogs- in the UK want ‘Le Cheapo’ day-in, day-out, widgets etc. so to enable them to also afford their subscription TV, the holiday abroad, the new family car every three years and so on.

      The UK knows the value of everything but the worth of nothing, but then bleat about being at risk of under-employed or unemployed and the fact that they will no longer be able to have all the non essential luxuries of life.

      • Edward2
        Posted January 26, 2016 at 9:59 pm | Permalink

        So is you solution, a siege economy with a quasi Berlin Wall for imports into the UK
        You need to think through this desire of yours Jerry
        Still living in the seventies.

        • Jerry
          Posted January 27, 2016 at 12:51 pm | Permalink

          @Edward2; “So is you solution, a siege economy with a quasi Berlin Wall for imports into the UK”

          No Edward, that seem to be what you would advise, my suggestion would be to stop complaining about what is basically capitalism, but that said if the opportunity to “Buy British” is available it might be worth considering an option – nothing “Berlin Wall” about that…

          • Edward2
            Posted January 27, 2016 at 3:45 pm | Permalink

            No Jerry I like free trade.
            Choice for consumers.
            If they wish to buy UK made products because they are good quality and well priced then that is up to them,

            You want only UK citizens to own UK companies.
            How are you going to achieve that?
            You also call for restrictions on imports from other countries.
            How are you going to achieve that?

          • Jerry
            Posted January 27, 2016 at 6:16 pm | Permalink

            @Edward2; Then you appear to be agreeing with me! I was replying to a complaint about companies off-shoring and UK cost savings by @bigneil, which you either did not bother to read his comment or are just trying to pick another one of your silly and tiring arguments, our host has better things to do as I do, thus feel free to have the last rant on this…

          • Edward2
            Posted January 28, 2016 at 11:50 am | Permalink

            No real reply though Jerry
            You regularly complain about foreign owned UK companies particularly in the automotive industry and complain about imports being bought by UK consumers but never ever mention how you would stop this.

    • Anonymous
      Posted January 26, 2016 at 6:37 pm | Permalink

      Big Neil – They do build their factories elsewhere in the world for this reason. They can manufacture things at a fraction of the price.

      You should have (for example) noticed the price of your favourite razor blades coming down since they moved factories from Britain to the BRICs… Oh dear.

      Well they haven’t come down in price. They still remain high value items with security tags on them. The people who used to make them in this country are probably on the dole or on minimum wage with state top-up.

      The workers have to be competitive but the prices aren’t.

      So what has been the upside for Britain in this particular arrangement ?

      • Jerry
        Posted January 26, 2016 at 10:02 pm | Permalink

        Anonymous; “Well they haven’t come down in price.”

        But nor have they increased in price, which they would almost certainly done had manufacturing remained in the UK or the EU.

  32. fedupsoutherner
    Posted January 26, 2016 at 4:58 pm | Permalink

    John, how is the UK expected to be a viable economy when we are going to be short of electricity in a few years time according to the Institute of Mechanical Engineers today? Apparently, we haven’t got the time to build the gas power stations or the nuclear we need to keep up with demand. This has been coming for along while and the governments have been warned but they have rushed headlong into a crisis without listening to the experts. They have a lot to answer for. If we want to trade we are going to have to do it with one hand tied behind our backs for manufacturing will be curtailed with the power cuts we can look forward to. Report here.

    http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/business/14229880.Government_energy_policy_will_hike_bills_and_lead_to_power_supply_gap/

  33. Jerry
    Posted January 26, 2016 at 5:04 pm | Permalink

    Something else a post Brexit government will be able to do as a self governing nation, as important as free trade agreements are, and that is extol the vestures of buying British made goods and services from UK owned and run companies.

  34. Maureen Turner
    Posted January 26, 2016 at 5:12 pm | Permalink

    I heard Sir Suart Rose yesterday sending out his disastrous warnings should the UK vote to leave the EU. In his opinion our trade with not only the EU but the rest of the world would be put at a severe disadvantage. It was dire stuff indeed and add to that each UK household would be £ 3,000 worse of in overall terms, ie., basics – such as food costs. I hope Mr. Redwood you will refute this at every opportunity.

    What constitutes a free and fair referendum under this government? It seems only the Remain vote can canvass for their cause whilst the the Leave vote can only wait until the details of the renegotiations in Brussels have been finalised. Surely this implies that the Remain groups already have notice of some form of agreement. Free and fair?

    Why can our elected government send out to every household in the land their promotional literature for a Remain vote without it being reciprocal to Leave? Is this where Mr. Soros’s and Goldman Sach’s “Remain” money is being spent? I understand the cost of merely delivering this “document” is in excess of £1 million. Free and fair?

    Probably most concerning is the flagrant bias of our taxpayer funded BBC which people’s political discussion programmes with individuals in favour of promoting Remain. This organisation breaks the requirements of its Royal Charter every day of the week but then again it seems our government sees this as ……. Free and fair!

    It is good to hear your constructive input Mr. Redwood and we can only hope that once the canvassing restrictions currently in place for Leave are lifted others will join you and turn up the volume. Everything is really froth and bubble if we can’t return to being a truly sovereign nation.

    • Anonymous
      Posted January 26, 2016 at 6:49 pm | Permalink

      MT – So long as the BBC keeps broadcasting on the refugee crisis (however sympathetically) there doesn’t need to be any Out literature, an Out campaign nor an Out figurehead.

      The BBC is doing the work nicely.

      It is scandalous that the murder of a refugee worker in Sweden was not BBC news. You can bet the murder of a refugee by a government worker in Sweden would have taken top slot.

      The problem is though, the BBC will stop reporting on the crisis running up to the referendum and all we will hear is “3 million jobs lost” or “£3000 per family lost” and people will buy it.

      They do not read detailed Eurosceptic blogs. They catch their news in between kid’s TV and soaps.

      • Anonymous
        Posted January 26, 2016 at 10:10 pm | Permalink

        Tony Blair is trapping off about the need to remain in the EU.

        That should be the death knell for it then.

    • forthurst
      Posted January 27, 2016 at 12:15 am | Permalink

      “Surely this implies that the Remain groups already have notice of some form of agreement. Free and fair?”

      No. Corporatists don’t care how much money has to be transferred to low wage migrants from tax payers or whatever. They dont care about our country full stop.

  35. forthurst
    Posted January 26, 2016 at 7:29 pm | Permalink

    Leaving the EU will be very good for internal trade as well, subject not to mindless EU Directives but to the will of Parliament. Our farmers will be encouraged to produce what the home market needs rather than those products which the EU decides to subsidise mostly for the benefit of French farmers. Our fishermen will be able to fish in our ancestral fishing grounds subject only to our own conservation needs.

    Furthermore, we will be able to encourage manufacturing industry by offering cheap, reliable and continuous power. Consequently it was disingenuous of the CBI, an organisation that attempts to browbeat its members into following its corporatist inclination to remain in the EU, bringing to mind the worst excesses of communist trade unions browbeating their membership into strikes, to ‘warn’, according to the Times, that “Tens of billions of pounds worth of investment in power stations, wind farms and other critical energy projects [are] needed to guarantee reliable electricity supplies”; we would not even be in this pickle were it not for the CBI’s wretched EU and its close down all industry and export it to the Orient Global Warming scam policies which have caused totally wasted investment in windmills that don’t spin while refusing to allow gas to become base load and closing down reliable coal fired base load supplies entirely.

    Its interesting to note that whereas such useful City types as fund managers are not averse to Brexit, the Wall Street banksters who bankroll both Parties in Congress, pay billions of dollars in fines for flogging fraudulent derivatives and other excesses, are bankrolling BSE; is there something they’ve caused to be incorporated in the secretive TTIP treaty that we don’t know about as with the rest of the negotiations from we we have been excluded?

  36. DaveM
    Posted January 26, 2016 at 7:45 pm | Permalink

    Slightly tongue-in-cheek, and something which has amused me for a while now.

    I’m sure most people here have seen Star Wars. Maybe George Lucas could predict our future. I wonder if anyone else has noticed that the evil “Empire” in Star Wars starts out as an organisation controlled by a bunch of shady evil characters, and it’s called………The Trade Federation.

  37. Original Richard
    Posted January 26, 2016 at 9:12 pm | Permalink

    “OUR OPPONENTS WILL CLAIM TRADE WILL BE DAMAGED AND THE UK WILL BE LIKE NORWAY”

    But how do we know that our trading (and banking ?) position will not be even worse than that of Norway if we remain in the EU particularly if we are outside of the Eurozone and in a “Associate Membership” position ?

    Being a member of the EU may mean we are not protected by WTO rules and other members, such as the Eurozone group could “gang up” against us using QMV rules.

    Just as the EU appears to be “ganging up” against Greece over the immigration issue despite this massive influx of migrants being caused by Mrs Merkel’s continued invitation to all and sundry to come to Europe.

    Another example of how club memership leads to a worse result is how English students are forced to pay Scottish tuition fees because they are in the UK but EU students do not.

    So “the great prize” that Mr. Cameron believes it to be to stay in the EU’s single market club could in fact be a heavy and unfair chain around our neck.

    • Original Richard
      Posted January 27, 2016 at 7:59 am | Permalink

      The forthcoming TTIP trade deal between the EU and the USA could well be detrimental to the UK and hence make Brexit the better option for us.

      There is no guarantee that the EU will be taking our concerns into consideration especially if we are outside the Eurozone.

  38. fedupsoutherner
    Posted January 26, 2016 at 10:17 pm | Permalink

    I see big problems coming in Denmark!! Let’s hope they want out too.

    • DaveM
      Posted January 27, 2016 at 4:52 pm | Permalink

      Bigger problems for Greece methinks. How can the EU (at Merkel’s bidding) have the audacity to invite the world’s population to N Europe via the Med, then get uppity with Greece when the Greeks – who I’m fairly certain didn’t invite them – usher them through. It’s beyond a joke.

      Combined with the Euro fiasco, it’s almost as if the EU is now regarding Greece as a buffer zone. Shouldn’t we be helping those people rather than kicking them while they’re down? Remind me why anyone wants to be in this horrific organisation? Someone tell Bosnia before it’s too late!!

  • About John Redwood


    John Redwood won a free place at Kent College, Canterbury, and graduated from Magdalen College Oxford. He is a Distinguished fellow of All Souls, Oxford. A businessman by background, he has set up an investment management business, was both executive and non executive chairman of a quoted industrial PLC, and chaired a manufacturing company with factories in Birmingham, Chicago, India and China. He is the MP for Wokingham, first elected in 1987.

  • 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