Why we will be better off out

1 We will be able to spend £10bn a year on our priorities instead of sending that abroad and not getting it back. That adds 0.6% to our GDP.

2. We will regain control of our fishing grounds, which will enable us to rebuild our fishery and return to being net exporters instead of net importers of fish.

3. We will be able to buy more of our food free of interventions by the EU designed to cut UK output and foster EU  imports. Past EU milk quotas and their response to BSE did damage to our dairy and beef farmers. Our food will be cheaper.

4. We can have our own energy policy geared to delivering more cheaper power. This means more of our income to spend on other things, and will be a big boost to industry which relies on energy.

5. We will be able to disapply  costly and unhelpful regulations  and EU requirements on all domestic business and exports to non EU destinations if we wish, whereas in the EU every rule has to apply to everything we do.

6. We will be free to negotiate our own trade deals with other countries, including the US one Mr Obama confirmed.

7. Our balance of payments will improve when we stop sending such large contributions to the continent.

8. There is no evidence that our growth rate accelerated when we joined the EEC, nor is there any evidence of much boost to our output from being in the Single market. The single market was completed around the same time as the European Exchange Rate Mechanism, a cost of EU membership, which slashed output and incomes very badly in the UK before we got out.

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

103 Comments

  1. CHRISTOPHER HOUSTON
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 5:30 am | Permalink

    It is not that we can do trade deals with the billions of people who live outside the EU: it is that they can do trade deals with us. They wish to. EU tariffs and so-called EU “free” trade deals are nothing of the sort. African, Asian, South American countries will be at the very front of the queue to trade with us. Massive potential. Bad for the EU.
    I see Mr Trump has triumphed yet again last night, this time in five states.Winning the lot.Hard to see Mr Cameron and Co being able to pat backs with him when he is President Trump nor the leaders of Scotland nor the leaders of the Labour Party nor the leaders of the EU. Change is a-coming. It has to.

  2. Lifelogic
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 5:58 am | Permalink

    Indeed all those.

    Plus the extra bonus that the economically illiterate, chancellor will have to go and we can replace him with someone would would finally keep his IHT promise and go for lower simpler taxes, less endless waste, no job destroying wage controls or other very silly gimmicks.

    Also we can be far more nimble in acting in our national interest quickly and decisively as when needed or any matter that arises.

    We can then have selective immigration taking only the best and not. Thus limiting the demands on the NHS, police, housing, schools and taking the best regardless of them being from outside the EU or not.

    Also we will be able to charge EU students the going rate for university courses and not have to give out loans, often loans never to repaid.

    • Hope
      Posted April 27, 2016 at 7:10 am | Permalink

      JR, to stop the snake biting cut off its head. You need to get rid of ………….. Dave. Today we read it is not possible to know the true immigration figures, we read from the US security chief that free movement in the EU allows ISIS to have cells in the UK, we read how one of the Paris attackers entered the UK several times. Then we hear lies from Cameron and May we are safer and secure in the EU! Cameronnsupporting Turkey entry to the EU! Six years and NO serious attempt to cut immigration from the EU, the numbers are staggering and our public services cannot sustain them- yet Hunt still wants to wage war on overworked doctors. No housing crisis either, it is an immigration crisis with serious security and safety implications for all of us. Ram the message home.

      • Hope
        Posted April 27, 2016 at 5:11 pm | Permalink

        JR, you really are doing a good job of highlighting the facts on this site. However, it is time you and the leave heavy weights started attacking Cameron and chums lies and the sort of people they really are.

        We also read IDS reiterating Cameron has given £2 billion to accelerate Turkey’s entry to the EU and that govt’s spokesman states that the govt does want the EU to expand supporting Turkey possibly joining the EU. Last week Osborne was trying to play down saying the UK had a veto. Remind me how Turkey joining the EU and having land borders with Syria and the like will make us safer? Turkey buying oil from ISIS?

        Cameron making smears of Farage’s name. It is reasonable and fair that he should accept the same. Is poncey a derogatory homophobic term?

    • Johnnydub
      Posted April 27, 2016 at 1:49 pm | Permalink

      Dont forget the often promised but never delivered “Bonfire of the Quangoes”

    • Bazman
      Posted April 27, 2016 at 9:42 pm | Permalink

      How was the BBC Implicated in the Hillsbrough crush on this basis? Lierlogic.

      • Lifelogic
        Posted April 28, 2016 at 9:01 am | Permalink

        I did not accuse the BBC of negligence over this, but as you mention it they largely did accept and repeat the lies from the authorities. They failed to investigate the real facts properly on the ground. Loads of people had witnessesed and knew exactly the truth about what happened from the very outset. Many in the police knew of the lies and statement changes on an industrial scale too.

        Yet the media and courts largely failed and the police’s huge PR and spin budgets and lies won for many years. Even now some are still pushing the lies.

  3. Lifelogic
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 6:09 am | Permalink

    At least Cameron for all his many faults did, some time back, offer a “profound” apology to the families of the 96 people who died, telling the House of Commons that today’s report made clear that “the Liverpool fans were not the cause of the disaster”.

    We finally see how appallingly, dishonestly and totally immorally the police and authorities can behave in these matters. How the courts totally failed the victims.

    Thousands their witnesses the truth of the matter. The knew the truth all the time and yet the liars, the establishment and the courts were able to bury the truth using public money, spin. lies and the court systems. All adding to the pain of the victims and for 27 years.

    At last some truth and justice. Whenever the government talk of “public services” this is so often what they actually mean, lies, propaganda, incompetence, cover ups and endless deception.

    • Know-dice
      Posted April 27, 2016 at 6:59 am | Permalink

      The establishment closed ranks and tried to ride this out.

      All respect to the Liverpool families that have at last got some justice…

    • Richard1
      Posted April 27, 2016 at 7:02 am | Permalink

      Yes it was a shocking episode but will anyone be held to account? Likewise I wonder whether when the chilcott report is finally published the people responsible for Britains greatest post war foreign policy disaster will actually be held to account. Far too often the collectivist mentality of the public services absolves incompetence, negligence and even perhaps criminality from accountability.

      • Lifelogic
        Posted April 28, 2016 at 4:55 am | Permalink

        I think being “held to account” in the state sector mean being paid off, retired early and enjoying a gold plated pension (paid for but the private sector whose pension are endlessly being mugged by Osborne). At best this will be one or two or the hundreds of people actually culpable.

        How many millions of public money was spent on the cover up over the 27 years so far. How much police manpower was wasted on this blatant deception and cover up?

        • Cheshire Girl
          Posted April 29, 2016 at 7:51 am | Permalink

          Looks like the taxpayer will be ‘held to account’. Large compensation claims could be looming, according to the papers today. Apparently this enquiry has already cost Sheffield taxpayers a sum of £12 per household., and the end does not appear to be in sight. Police Budgets have been consistently cut over the past few years. Perhaps people should remember that when police numbers have to be cut again to pay for this. Remember, the taxpayer always foots the bill for this kind of incident!

    • Lifelogic
      Posted April 27, 2016 at 7:27 am | Permalink

      Thousands there witnessed the truth – is what I meant – must go to Specsavers these phones are far to small plus they keep guessing, wrongly what I am trying to type.

    • Antisthenes
      Posted April 27, 2016 at 8:38 am | Permalink

      The jury was not unanimously in favour of the verdicts so perhaps some caution on laying blame. Perhaps awaiting criminal proceedings if any and their outcomes will be the time to pass judgement on where the faults lie.

    • lojolondon
      Posted April 27, 2016 at 10:07 am | Permalink

      Treat that apology with a spade of salt. Cameron, like Blair, will easily apologise for things that did not occur on his watch. Try getting him to apologise for something he actually did, you will see a very different response.

    • Anonymous
      Posted April 27, 2016 at 10:15 am | Permalink

      “Liverpool fans were not the cause of the disaster”

      It is heresy to say – but for the poor people to be crushed at the front, someone was pushing another human being from behind for no other reason than they wanted to see a show.

      Would you ever push another human to get into a show, Lifelogic ? I know I wouldn’t.

      The police were there because of the risk of football violence. They weren’t there to do the private football industry’s hospitality and ground safety duties.

      In fact football hospitality and safety was virtually non existent at the time. Fans were treated worse than cattle. Your statement cannot be left to stand without mention of the very big differences between the football ground safety then and the football ground safety now:

      – crush barriers
      – limited tickets
      – all seater venues
      – escape routes
      – dedicated stewards

      It didn’t need an incident to forsee that these things were needed. In fact there had already been such and incident – at Heysel.

      The difference between what was provded then and what is provided now is the level of culpability that the FA and football clubs in this awful incident. And that culpability is huge. They should be in the dock on charges of corporate manslaughter.

      As it is the taxpayer will be paying for this one too.

      • Lifelogic
        Posted April 27, 2016 at 4:48 pm | Permalink

        Indeed and now they are even telling what immigration will be post Brexit clearly something that will be decided upon democratically, after Cameron and Osborne have gone. How can they know?

        At least we will surely not take all of the many net liability ones.

      • Lifelogic
        Posted April 27, 2016 at 4:54 pm | Permalink

        The cover up and endless lies, and far worse, from the police force, after the disaster was totally unforgivable. The total failure of the courts and Legal system unforgivable too.

        What sort of inhumans robots made these outrageous decisions.

        • Anonymous
          Posted April 27, 2016 at 9:20 pm | Permalink

          True, Lifelogic (4.54)

          But the real villains of the piece have got off lightly:

          – the clubs that didn’t provide safe grounds or systems
          – the FA
          – the hooligans that created the need for barriers
          – impatient people who literally push others in crowds

      • Hope
        Posted April 27, 2016 at 5:19 pm | Permalink

        We all feel for the poor souls who tragically died. This should not have happened and we must try to prevent a recurrence. There was also tragedyat a football in Scotland as well where people lost their lives. Like you I cannot understand how the fans are totally exonerated. It was not an orderly queue. Fans behaviour then was different to today. I really do not know how Burnham has the Gaul to make such remarks after NHS deaths in Staffordshire. Remind me how he was held to account? Parliament is still rotten to its core and after promises to reform by all main parties no significant action after 7 years!

      • Edward2
        Posted April 27, 2016 at 7:18 pm | Permalink

        Totally agree.

        • Anonymous
          Posted April 27, 2016 at 8:30 pm | Permalink

          Edward 2 – I feel the country is gripped by a collective outpouring. Even Katie Hopkins.

          I saw the incident unfold live on TV and was traumatised by it. I have EVERY sympathy with the families of the victims.

          We shall take it as fact that day that no blokes had been drinking and forgotten their manners anywhere near the grounds.

          The implication of the result is this: That Margaret Thatcher had imbued the police with such impunity that they had run amok with legality at Hillsborough. We’ve even had a claim in the Daily Mail today – on the back of this – that the police probably did incite violence during the Miner’s Strike.

          In the context of that era we had:

          – flying picketting and mass violence against strike breakers
          – mass violence at football matches
          – an IRA terror campaign – REAL terror, not the fake stuff of today

          Times were hard. Lines were blurred.

          I believe that the police were tasked with a job beyond their remit and capabilities. They panicked. They saw themselves being set up and tried to cover it up.

          Yes. This was an outrage and prosecutions must follow, but it does not make them murderers. And nor are they the true villains of the piece.

          The football clubs, the FA and (above all) the hooligans are. They are the ones that caused unsuitable barriers to be there in the first place.

          • Anonymous
            Posted April 27, 2016 at 8:31 pm | Permalink

            Add to that list of violence – race rioting.

      • Ken Moore
        Posted April 28, 2016 at 10:11 pm | Permalink

        It’s a fact that at 2.44pm the Liverpool fans were ‘asked to stop pushing’ so to say the conduct of fans in no way, however small, contributed to the disaster is strange.

        The CCTV images clearly show fans climbing onto the roof of the turnstiles and rushing forward in a less than orderly manner.

        http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/turnstile-operator-tells-hillsborough-inquests-7782185

        Did the turnstyle operator just imagine all of this ?….why did he say that he ‘feared for his life’ ?

        Of course it is extremely politically incorrect to point this out – the modern doctrine of political correctness is always going to support the weak ‘oppressed’ fans over the powerful police force.

        A society where individuals have absolutely no responsibility for their actions and where authorities are routinely blamed for failing to prevent or manage those actions is a very unhealthy society.

        Of course the Police were massively incompetent and dishonest which is inexcusable – ultimately they made a terrible mistake under pressure for which they should have owned up. But the Police on that day had a far from easy job.

    • Johnnydub
      Posted April 27, 2016 at 1:49 pm | Permalink

      Pournelle’s Iron Law of Bureaucracy in harsh effect.

  4. CHRISTOPHER HOUSTON
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 6:28 am | Permalink

    The EU Emergency Fund was accessed by Poland and others because of sanctions imposed by Russia in retaliation for same. I believe these sanctions are in theory lifted now due to Minsk Agreements. Not sure if our cheddar exports to Russia have restarted. Perhaps we have to wait for an EU nod. There will be other trade warfare actions by EU leaders whilst we must back it up with our money. Mr Obama has indicated that trade warfare by the EU is part of his military strategy. He does not need to persuade the EU either. Ex-Grand Duchy of Luxembourg President Juncker enjoys flexing his might on Russia’s cheddar chompers.

  5. Antisthenes
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 6:35 am | Permalink

    What is not to like about Brexit? Nothing as far as I can discern as what you list above would certainly be possible and more besides. Being a member of the EU feels to me like a sane person being duped into enter an asylum for the insane . Being in that position and given the opportunity to escape a sane person would grasp at the chance. If that person preferred to stay then the conclusion has to be that person is not sane or at the least very stupid.

    Do we wish to wear that straight jacket and hand it on to our children and our grand children or not. What possible reason can we give for such an action. Do we say we do not any longer believe in the freedoms and rights that we spent centuries in creating. That now we believe in despotism where others make our choices for us? I cannot see anyone thanking us for that except the despots of course and they abound in large numbers. The politicians, bureaucrats, progressives and other vested interests. For us the common person there is nothing in it for us other than being at the mercy of these despots.

  6. John Bracewell
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 6:40 am | Permalink

    Your list plus:
    1. More control over immigration.
    2. Better democracy in that we can vote in and out those who govern us, unlike Van Rompey, Juncker etc..
    3. More control over our legal system where a Supreme Court really becomes supreme.
    4. A return to co-operation with our European friends instead of moaning and being disgruntled by the member countries of the EU.
    5. The removal of uncertainty about our EU membership which has divided the UK for 50 years.

  7. Dioclese
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 6:42 am | Permalink

    Blimey John! Shurely you not actually going to give us facts and lay out the case for leaving – something which I feel your friends in the Out campaign are manifestly failing to do.

    You need to tell them to up their profile if we are to escape the shackles of the EUSSR…

    • sm
      Posted April 28, 2016 at 6:13 am | Permalink

      Dioclese – our host has now spent weeks (indeed years!) explaining the case for leaving, as have Dan Hannan, Michael Gove, IDS etc.

      • Dioclese
        Posted April 29, 2016 at 11:44 am | Permalink

        True – and all credit to them all.
        But it’s not catching the public eye like Project Fear. The profile needs raising.

  8. Mike Stallard
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 6:48 am | Permalink

    I totally agree.
    But how will we get out? That is the question really.
    And how long will it take?
    Answer= Join the EFTA organisation and make sure of the EEA membership then apply Article 50, send in a team of negotiators and go from there. That way it will all be legal, above board and as good as we can make it.
    OR:
    Duck the questions, lose the referendum and then face the acceptance of Associate Membership under the New Spinelli Constitution. We will then be forever a colony of the European Empire paying our “fair share” but having no voice at all in any meetings either international or European.
    This is getting very serious indeed because the Europeans who are planning this are not appearing to announce their nefarious plans on TV or even in the press – although they are freely available on the internet.

  9. agricola
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 6:52 am | Permalink

    Leaving will be an opportunity to once again hold our heads high with increased self respect. It will put behind us the distractions of being in the EU where process takes president over timely action. It will allow us to concentrate on what matter to the UK and in particular England which is the engine house of the UK.

    Having watched part of the Police and Crime Bill, not in content but in procedure, as it went through the Commons, I was most impressed with an example of the grotesquely inefficient way in which the chamber operates. The time wasted to allow bodies to vote is unbelievable in the age of the computer. Not only is the building in dire need of repair , so too is the arcane way it operates. Little wonder that the productivity of the UK is always in question when one sees government in operation.

  10. Know-dice
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 6:57 am | Permalink

    Thanks for this, keep the message simple though…

    What does 0.6% of GDP and £10 billion repatriated buy?
    How many Schools, Hospitals, Power Stations or doctors can you get for 0.6% GDP?

    Bang home the “We don’t currently have a trade deal with the USA” and how bad TTIP is, there are suggestions that TTIP could cost 2-3million jobs in the EU!!!

    Why has the Government NOT published what it will do in the event of Brexit, in particular that it will continue to fund farms etc. who currently receive EU funds (our money). This REALLY needs to come from the Government – Get them in a corner over this.

    Simplify and extract the relevant portions of the “Five Presidents Report”. don’t let the Remainders get away with the simple untruth, “that to remain means our relationship with the EU doesn’t change”. Explain in simple terms what Economic & Political union would mean to us in the UK.

    Explain that “sovereignty” means more than just having a Queen.

    Should we worry about the effect on the stability of Europe and the EU if we leave?

    Have you written tomorrows topic yet?

    Why we will be worse off in

    • walter barrington
      Posted April 27, 2016 at 6:20 pm | Permalink

      Well said

    • Vanessa
      Posted April 28, 2016 at 8:57 am | Permalink

      Know-dice – to answer your question you need only watch Owen Paterson’s speech as to how the EU will fast-track all the “ever closer union” issues for Britain if we stay.
      http://www.eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=86037

  11. mick
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 7:25 am | Permalink

    Here`s another reason were better off out, my local job centre is asking for Albanian interpreters and translators all be it self employed it`s £30 a hour, makes me bloody mad if they carn`t speak English they should`nt be here, i`m sure if i went to a foreinge country i would have to pay for a interpreter no wonder people are cheesed off

    • agricola
      Posted April 27, 2016 at 3:54 pm | Permalink

      You are quite right Mick. Spanish hospitals insist on you either speaking Spanish or hiring your own interpreter. My GP likes to improve his English so we resort to Spanglish. Despite the financial pressure they are under the medical service is excellent, and the insurance costs for private hospitals is half what it was in the UK ten years ago.

  12. bluedog
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 7:26 am | Permalink

    Excellent points, Dr JR. As the EU works on the principle of ‘wider still and wider, shall thy bounds be set’, the retreat of the UK from this particular imperium opens up unique opportunities. Tax arbitrage is one. EU mandated VAT at 20%? Why in the UK its only 15%, and so on. In addition, as the EU expands and applies its regulations to an ever greater area of the Continent, an increasing number of EU enterprises and individuals will seek more flexible business arrangements, which an intelligently managed British economy can provide.

    One hundred years ago next month, the Royal Navy’s Grand Fleet fought the German High Seas Fleet to a draw at the Battle of Jutland. The Germans retired to port and never re-emerged until the war ended. Then in 1919 the German battlefleet sailed into captivity at Scapa Flow, escorted by the RN, the USN and Commonwealth navies. As his rust-streaked ships steamed out of their home port for the last time, the German Admiral Tirpitz was heard to remark, ‘So, the old pirate state has won again’. If the campaign for Brexit succeeds, we need to prove to ourselves that the German officer would recognise the same entrepreneurial tenacity in the independent Britain of the future.

  13. Ian Wragg
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 7:45 am | Permalink

    We all agree with what you say John. It’s a pity Cummings and Co. aren’t on board.
    The Electoral Commission will have a lot to answer for compromising their independence to support the Remain side.
    I think your party is now finished John. If remain win it will be down to a disgraceful establishment stitch up.

  14. Paul
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 7:53 am | Permalink

    There’s just the minor benefit of being able to control immigration also, which is why most people voting to leave are doing so, highlighting fish and food is great but it’s hardly a vote winner.

  15. Bert Young
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 7:57 am | Permalink

    The list John has produced – has referred to many times in the past months , is exactly what should be put through every door ; if this happened it would shift the opinion polls heavily in favour of Brexit . The scaremongerers will continue on the “trade” and “economy” issues but , from now on , it will have less effect .

    The queue of countries with extremely poor economies and large populations pose an enormous threat to the future of the EU and to us , if we remain in , it would spell turmoil and disaster . It has been stipulated that we would be able to impose a veto preventing the entry of these countries , I don’t believe this would happen ; Cameron has been supportive of the Turkey case in any event .

    The sooner we are “free” and able to paddle our own canoe the better . The net £10bn is a very juicy cake .

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted April 27, 2016 at 3:15 pm | Permalink

      Well, we wouldn’t have any say through a referendum.

  16. majorfrustration
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 8:09 am | Permalink

    and a major clear out at the BBC – anybody hear the “BBC is not biased” on Today – who do they wheel out but………… Paten

  17. CHRISTOPHER HOUSTON
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 9:06 am | Permalink

    On Brexit there will be repercussions in each EU nation state depending on their individual trade with the UK. Some will make polite requests to the EU leadership to offer them guarantees that their own trade will not be disrupted. Others will insist on guarantees if their country is relatively small to the size of trade. A politically and economical volatile time for the EU which could very well ask the UK to extend the two year’s leaving procedures. Inevitably there will be increased QE for EU nation state finances and a lowering of the Euro.

    Same year, America most likely will change too with Mr Trump as President in November. Mr Cameron has insulted him publicly on a personal level. No getting away from it. No ifs no buts. Sticky though for a country wishing a trade deal with the USA and other grown-up affairs of state.
    So we will be better off out of the EU best accompanied by a new Prime Minister. When President Trump visits we should give the SNP MPs five new shiny one pound coins each and ask them to go for extended holidays back to Scotland keeping away from golf courses and any industrial enterprises needing investment. If they refuse the money and request, then we should ask them to keep as quiet as they possibly can. Perhaps give them a really big coconut macaroon apiece which cannot be physically eaten when speaking without spitting out bits of coconut. We must trust to their table manners.

  18. CHRISTOPHER HOUSTON
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 9:31 am | Permalink

    It may be a good idea for the Leave Campaign to draw up a list of individual EU states quoting their import/export figures to the UK and elsewhere if the Civil Service is able and not prevented by the Establishmen t. Account or allowance should be made that such figures may be extensively modified that, strangely, a place in Holland ,whose name temporarily escapes me, is attributed as the “Exporter” or “Importer”.
    * I confess to reading “Contrarian” or/and “Libertarian” ( covering a multitude of sins ) economic analyses of EU trade.
    Much “smoke and mirrors” is at the heart of EU economic propaganda. A whole industry could develop in exposing the EU LIE. ” One knows so little….”

  19. forthurst
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 9:31 am | Permalink

    Under the Brussels regime, the direction of travel is clear; they may have backed off crooked cucumbers, but on important matters they do not back down. The creation of an EU Army will be followed, inevitably, by an EU Navy and Air Force. In such circumstances we can look forward, if we are stupid enought to Remain, to all decisions about armaments to be taken by the Brussels Kommissariat under whom our own arms manufacturers would suffer a precipitous decline as we were obliged to purchase French and German products whilst trying to convince our customers that ours were better. The most likely consequence is a fire sale of defence manufacturers as we become even weaker economically, moving down to the level of Eastern Europe and countries like Sweden etc ed.

  20. oldtimer
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 9:43 am | Permalink

    I would add:
    re 1 on your list, the UK will avoid future increases to that net £10 billion membership fee. They will assuredly increase if the UK economy grows as forecast by the Remain campaign.Probably measured in billions.

    More generally the UK will avoid the costs of providing the public services (schools, hospitals, housing and other infrastructure) required for the extra 3 million migrants predicted under freedom of movement rules less those admitted under an Australian style points system. Probably measured in billions.

  21. Horatio
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 9:52 am | Permalink

    Great tweet and wonderful stat from Suzanne Evans this morning:

    Africa makes £2.4bn from coffee exports. Non-coffee growing Germany £3.8bn. That’s how bad protectionist tariffs are.

    Hope Leavers remember Ashsown: cheaper food on exit. Rose: higher wages Clegg: more sovereignty.

  22. Kenneth
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 10:01 am | Permalink

    I would also add that we will be a very good springboard for new innovations that could benefit Europe.

    This is the scenario:

    1. A company has a new widget which is likely to be very successful but is hampered by eu regulations which have not kept up with technology

    2. The company lobbies the eu to change the regulations. We know many large corporations do this successfully but many, especially without large Brussels lobby operations, do not.

    3. So, they launch their new project in non-eu UK where the regulations are more flexible and costs are lower

    4. This proves their case and causes the eu to alter the regulations for fear of losing business

    Outside the eu we could be a centre for new cutting-edge technology and innovation.

  23. dennisambler
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 10:02 am | Permalink

    “We can have our own energy policy geared to delivering more cheaper power. ”
    We already have our own energy policy, in addition to that of the EU, enshrined in the Climate Change Act.

    It is difficult to see how we can have cheaper power so long as it remains in force.

  24. Ken Moore
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 10:06 am | Permalink

    It’s surprising that the matter of not having to make provision for a population increase, the equivalent to the size of Coventry every year , didn’t make the cut today.
    I was only saying yesterday the IN side are hamstrung by political correctness and afraid of playing their trump card. I’m in favour of good race relations and a harmonious society – why do the IN side want to put this in jeopardy?.

    What about the cultural problems of assimilating millions of people from a culture quite different from our own?….even if you don’t accept that the pressures on services are quite unsustainable.

    Of course the chattering classes argument think it’s rude and ‘unhelpful’ to talk about immigration…they can afford to pay for schools, hospitals, expensive houses and their jobs are not likely to be undercut. I would prefer if John Redwood didn’t side with this group quite so much….

    Reply I always mention the need to control our own borders, and challenge Remainers over possible Turkish/Ukrainian/Serbian membership of EU and visa waiver programmes

    • Ken Moore
      Posted April 27, 2016 at 3:38 pm | Permalink

      Thanks Dr Redwood ,(please delete previous repeated post with errors )

      I note you have challenged the remainers on the the subject of Eu expansion. However I am sure you do not need me to tell you that campaigning is about repetition (as the In side know only too well they repeat the same tired old mantra). A new reader to today’s John Redwood diary would come away with the impression that you don’t much care about immigration or don’t wish to discuss it as the subject didn’t make it onto your list…..

      The OUT side are for good race relations based on SUSTAINABLE levels of immigration that benefit EVERYONE- why shouldn’t we want to talk about that!

  25. oldtimer
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 10:16 am | Permalink
  26. ale bro
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 10:34 am | Permalink

    The article outlines an interesting programme of changes that might happen post Brexit, but I can’t see any clarity around what will happen if Leave wins the vote.

    There is no certainty around what actions the UK government would take post exit, and the Leave campaign are not in a position to make any promises about what will happen post Brexit – is it likely that any of the Brexit campaigners would be in government? Will we get a new PM?

    There is a desperate lack of clarity around what would happen if leave is successful, and this makes it difficult to vote leave – better the devil you know!

    For me to vote leave, I would need to see a list of proposed legislation that would action the points above, and also would restore basic freedoms that may be lost post Brexit – e.g. employment rights, human rights. Leave has had a long time to develop this but as far as I can see, it isn’t offering any certainty around what will happen if the leave vote is successful.

    Reply Once we take back control we will rapidly move to have the immigration and benefit laws we want, to remove EU taxes we don’t like and to assert the supremacy of Parliament and people again.

    • Antisthenes
      Posted April 27, 2016 at 3:31 pm | Permalink

      ” to assert the supremacy of Parliament and people again.”

      That appears familiar did we not fight a bloody civil war over that very principle and did not a king lose his head over it.

      I cannot picture anything more alluring than the sight of 5 EU presidents (getting ed) their just punishment. Followed of course by those other quislings.

    • hefner
      Posted April 27, 2016 at 4:39 pm | Permalink

      “Immigration and benefit laws we want, remove EU taxes we don’t like, assert supremacy of Parliament and people”. It sounds good, any more details please:

      What changes would you propose in Parliament? Please.

      • ale bro
        Posted April 28, 2016 at 8:33 am | Permalink

        “Asserting the supremacy of Parliament and people” sounds a lot like removing the monarch to me

  27. Dan H.
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 10:35 am | Permalink

    Sir,
    Another possible boost: we can scrap Value Added Tax and instead replace it with a simple sales tax. From the point of view of the man in the street, this won’t change much but from the point of view of HMRC it will be lovely.

    VAT, as we all know, works on the basis that everyone pays it, but everyone except the end of the chain can claim it back from a government. This means that a nifty little tax fraud known as Carousel Fraud is exceedingly easy to pull off, and quite hard to detect. Carousel Frauds are difficult to detect, and cost the UK Government billions per annum in lost tax.

    Were we to secede from the EU, we would no longer be a part of their VAT system and would therefore no longer lose money due to VAT fraud in this way. As the government only has money which it has obtained by tax from its citizens, defrauding the government is ultimately defrauding the taxpayer.

  28. Deborah
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 10:45 am | Permalink

    I always wondered why they stopped reporting the balance of payments on the news. It used to be a standard item when I was younger, reported regularly and widely commented upon like the interest rate. Now nobody mentions it.
    Of course. Now I understand. It would highlight how much we are paying to the EU.

  29. Ken Moore
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 11:02 am | Permalink

    The government are forever looking both ways at once with the Eu. The deception is all around us…
    ‘Tackling air pollution’ is a ‘priority’…but they want to massively increase population density and pollution.
    They wish to ‘eradicate child poverty’ …when they preside over an immigrant led baby boom that is stretching services…
    ‘Tackling global warming’ is another priority….which is hard to do when your borders are open to 300 million people who may wish to drive cars and use central heating…
    They want to ‘tackle low pay’…but import low paid workers on a grand scale which depresses wages and productivity…

  30. behindthefrogs
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 11:57 am | Permalink

    I find it appalling that the UK is likely to leave the EU and remove our contributions to the poorer members of the EU like Greece. We should recognize and be pleased that we contribute more than we receive and be using our limited powers in the EU to ensure that our excess contributions go to those who most need them.
    I do not hear the people of the UK griping about their contributions to the poorer areas of the UK. Why should belonging to the EU not include similar responsibilities. It is not a reason for leaving the EU but a reason for staying in and recognizing the responsibilities of belonging to the club.

    • ian wragg
      Posted April 27, 2016 at 5:03 pm | Permalink

      I do hope that was written tongue in cheek.

      • behindthefrogs
        Posted April 28, 2016 at 2:00 pm | Permalink

        No I am serious about objecting to the leave campaign using our positive contributions to the EU as an excuse for leaving. In fact it is their complete lack of any social responsibility for other members of the EU that will probably cause me to vote remain. It is typical of the sort of people who similarly take illegal actions to avoid paying tax.

    • libertarian
      Posted April 27, 2016 at 7:26 pm | Permalink

      behindthefrogs

      Why stop at Greece, why only pay for poor people in EU? What about poor people in the rest in the rest of the world, do you have no compassion or is it just a race thing with you?

      Congratulations for the most ridiculous post of the day

      NB, Greece wouldn’t be poor, if it left the EU, reclaimed the drachma and devalued

  31. Vanessa
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 12:25 pm | Permalink

    I read today that Vote.Leave does NOT want to leave but to renegotiate our membership with the EU. I am disgusted that the Electoral Commission chose such a corrupt “opposition” group to the government’s “Remain”. They also received £7 million to spend on their campaign and if you look at their leaflets they say NOTHING.
    This should be referred to the courts.

    Reply Vote leave is dedicated to securing an Out vote!

    • ian wragg
      Posted April 27, 2016 at 5:06 pm | Permalink

      Just explain how that is John.
      I have gad brochures from LeaveEU and UKIP we have regular stalls on the local market from these two but nothing from VoteLeave.
      Their website is a mess and they do not wish to discuss immigration.
      You backed the wrong horse and it will cost us the referendum.
      Cummings does not want to leave the EU and is an establishment plant.

      • stred
        Posted April 28, 2016 at 12:50 pm | Permalink

        These media and PR people do seem to be Vicars of Bray, swapping sides frequently. Today, Private Eye reports that a journalist from the Express, a Mr Swift, has been helping with their anti- EU headlines recently and is going to help ex PR spinner Eural and failed journalist Gideon in Downing street. It takes one to know one.

        As regards paper publicity, a few neighbours have put up posters saying Support Europe. This gives the impression that Leavers do not like Europe. The EU word is not used. These leaflets must have some effect on the undecided and dim, but most people will ignore them. In order to make a passer by notice and think about it a poster should attract attention and perhaps make them wonder what is behind the advert. Then they may go home and google the phrase.

        An idea would be JUNK JUNKER (EU UNELECTED PRESIDENT) or SPINELLI-NOT ON YOUR NELLI and WHY DO WE NEED FIVE PRESIDENTS WHEN THE US HAS ONE. When googled a page on the frightening aims and background of Junkers, Verhofstdt and Coen Bendits could be made available. Project fear would be turned on its head.

    • acorn
      Posted April 27, 2016 at 5:22 pm | Permalink

      Dear naive Vanessa, you have to appreciate that Eurosceptic “Vote Leave” Conservative MPs, need to maintain an escape route, back to the body of the Conservative Party, after the referendum. You will not hear JR or any euro-sceptic Conservative MP, calling for Cameron and Osborne to stand down.

      The Conservative Party is allowing its euro-sceptic MPs, to put on a good show, for the sake of our sham democracy. Eurosceptic MPs, know there is a line that must not be crossed in this pantomime.

      Regardless of the outcome of the referendum, the Conservative Party MUST SURVIVE. The 1%, will spend millions to make sure it does and continues to enrich the capitalist hegemony. It won’t particularly matter to trans-national corporates, whether the UK is in or out of the EU, of any other currency / tax area. There are ways of mitigating such inconveniences.

    • Vanessa
      Posted April 28, 2016 at 8:59 am | Permalink

      JR – No they do not want to leave. Look at this government letter
      http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/04/26/exclusive-establishment-vote-leave-camp-admits-not-want-leave-eu-wants-negotiation-27-eu-member-states/

      Reply Do just help us win! Mr Jenkin is being very energetic and helpful in the campaign, and makes crystal clear I his letter that Leave means leave, including the possibility that we just legislate to end the Treaties in the UK. He is right that we will negotiate a new trade arrangement after winning the vote.

  32. Vanessa
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 12:29 pm | Permalink

    On another issue. Owen Paterson’s speech is brilliant on the awful consequences of voting to remain in the EU. As he says, the status quo option is not on the table. The EU has 5 more countries queuing to join up and all poor, eastern countries. That will increase our bill for the EU each year.
    This is the link to watch Mr Paterson’s speech
    http://www.eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=86037

    • acorn
      Posted April 27, 2016 at 4:49 pm | Permalink

      Remember the last time we had a high tide in the Somerset Meadows, Minister Paterson, called in sick. Alas, compared with Amber Rudd, Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change (etc ed).

    • oldtimer
      Posted April 27, 2016 at 5:40 pm | Permalink

      Thanks for the link.

      It is essential that voters understand what a “reformed” EU actually will look like. It is certainly not the status quo. The Remain campaign will not spell this out. It is the task of the Leave campaign to do so at every opportunity. That way offers the chance for the Leave campaign to get on to the front foot and challenge the Remain campaign to setbout the consequences of Remain. They are not benign.

  33. Mike Wilson
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 12:31 pm | Permalink

    Sorry, off topic, but I have to say I find Cameron, these days, to be an utterly repulsive person. When he became leader of the Tory Party in 2005 he seemed a pleasant, decent enough sort of person. Whilst PM in the coalition government, he was still largely the same, although what appears to be his true colours did show through at times. Now, watching him at PMQs, he is utterly revolting. I would much prefer to have a PM who carried himself in a dignified and restrained manner. He really does look like a school bully these days.

    You’d think someone in the Tory Party would have a word in his ear. He has a majority. He has some sort of mandate (although only 25% of the electorate voted Tory). A bit of humility would go a long way. You can tell someone you disagree with them in a dignified way. You don’t have to try to show them up all the time to get a few cheers from the half-wits sitting behind you.

  34. Mike Wilson
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 12:36 pm | Permalink

    Andrew Neill and Evan Davies constantly ask Leavers to name one reputable organisation that favours leaving and which has produced figures to show we would be better off. Of course those producing figures that show we will all be penniless if we leave are all discredited. But it doesn’t stop the BBC trotting out a list … the IMF, the OECD, the Treasury, Barack Obama (famous economist who, like most economists is never wrong!), the ONS etc. etc.

    The fact that none of them can forecast economic performance 3 months ahead seems to pass these people by. The fact most of them wanted us in the Euro is ignored.
    What is your answer to Which reputable organisation supports Leave?

    Reply Economists for Britain, a long list of entrepreneurs, Conservatives for Britain, Labour for Britain, half the british people etc

  35. MartinW
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 1:23 pm | Permalink

    I do not disagree with any of these. As one who voted in 1975 to get out of the EEC, I am certain that this time the urgency is even greater. But, the most important question is HOW do we extract ourselves from the intolerably un-democratic bureaucracy in which we are thoroughly enmeshed, without our trade being significantly affected. As I see it, Vote Leave has not yet provided a credible scenario or plan, and therefore cannot yet provide enough assurance to the general public that their well-being will not be damaged. I do not think assertions that “we are strong enough”, and “It’ll be alright on the night” are good enough.

    Reply We have an entirely credible plan – why and how do you think France and Germany will impose barriers to their trade with us? They sell us much more than we sell them! We are all in the WTO anyway.

    • David Price
      Posted April 27, 2016 at 3:31 pm | Permalink

      I agree with your point Martin that assertions and calls to trust one group rather than another do not constitute a viable plan. Where are the objectives, priorities, timescales, responsibilities, actions, costs?

      How will we curb immigration, how will we establish the true scale of it, who will be responsible for this and by when.

      How will our fisheries be returned, by when and how will our local fleet be re-established. How much will need to be spent on fishery protection.

      What steps will be taken to establish our energy security, by when and at what cost.

      What objectives will be set for negotiating new trade deals, who will be doing this and to what timescales.

      Mr Cummings appears to have already spent the £10b surplus on the NHS, so where is the rest of the money going to come from to do all these things?

      • MartinW
        Posted April 28, 2016 at 8:00 am | Permalink

        Richard North has explained in simple terms this morning on his EURef blog the need for a workable, legal and safe plan, and shows clearly (as we all know) that at the moment Vote Leave, who refuse to acknowledge the need for a coherent exit plan, are damaging the ‘leave’ campaign and are taking us to defeat. As RN rightly says “Vote Leave must listen to its critics, concede it was wrong and move rapidly to publish a coherent exit plan – and then stand by it. If it does not, I don’t see how we can win.” Vote Leave must reject the Cummings (non)-plan, otherwise we fail.

        Reply 2 of the last 3 polls show Leave ahead! Just get on with helping us win.

        • David Price
          Posted April 29, 2016 at 6:44 am | Permalink

          @Reply
          Help who win what? Not one leaflet through the door or any concerted campaign by the shadowy Vote.Leave group yet. People are not hearing the messages you eloquently lay out in your blog and believe what they are being told by the massed array of pro-EU news media, activists who play on uncertainty and fear.

          Why aren’t the luminaries of Vote.Leave out in the country instead of politiking in London, convincing people that they have a rational plan and can be trusted. From the interviews of Johnson, Patel, Gove it appears there isn’t even a coordinated briefing process.

          Why is there no clear cooperation between all the Leave groups.

          Reply. please help us deliver by volunteering for your local Vote leave or Go group

  36. The PrangWizard
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 1:53 pm | Permalink

    Just heard your Prime Minister and party leader gratuitously insulting Mr Farage by calling him foreign ‘poncey’ because of the way he pronounces his name. Set up for him by a member of the opposition too I noticed.

    May I ask you Mr Redwood if your car is kept in a ‘gararge’, a garage, or a ‘garidge’. I’m a northerner so I often say ‘garidge’, although I can say ‘gararge’ too having been in the south many years. How do you say it? How many of your friends and colleagues say ‘gararge’? Would poncey therefore apply to you too?

    Maybe we ought to have a competition about French words and pronunciation which we have adopted, and which of them are acceptable to Cameron and his clique. Does Cameron make fun of ‘rendezvous’, perhaps, that’s foreign, is it ‘poncey’? Does he use the word, presumably not.

    Your man gets more odious by the minute. Heaven knows what he will be like if the remainers win and he stays on. No doubt he feels all puffed up following Obama’s visit, he was also good on insults, directed at the UK and many individuals in it.

    We must vote out of the EU and then get Cameron out too.

    • miami.mode
      Posted April 28, 2016 at 12:32 am | Permalink

      TPW. I wonder what David Cameron would have thought or said about Barack Obama if BO had spoken about putting his automobile in his garaaarge (with the full emphasis on the latter syllable.

      Rather pathetic of the PM, in addition to the questioner, in trying to disparage Nigel Farage as my feeling has always been that we tend to Anglicise place names such as Paris, Munich, etc, but to use the correct foreign pronunciation for people, but maybe I’m old-fashioned.

    • fedupsoutherner
      Posted April 28, 2016 at 9:19 am | Permalink

      Couldn’t agree more. Nigel Farage is one of the hardest working people in this fight and I get fed up of the derogatory remarks slung his way. Cameron should be careful because his attitude could lose him the remain vote. On second thoughts, carry on Mr Cameron, we might just get what we want due to your foul behaviour towards others.

  37. Denis Cooper
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 2:43 pm | Permalink

    “There is no evidence that our growth rate accelerated when we joined the EEC, nor is there any evidence of much boost to our output from being in the Single market.”

    Here is a chart of the annual growth rate of the UK economy going back to 1956:

    http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/gdp-growth-

    which supports that statement.

    As far as the Single Market is concerned, the UK government has accepted the view of the EU Commission that most likely it has increased the GDP of the whole EU by about 2%, but that one-off benefit would be spread over a number of years and so it would hardy be detectable in the statistics; but that is even more true if this report is correct and the UK is one of the countries which has benefited least, by only 1% of per capita GDP:

    https://www.bertelsmann-stiftung.de/fileadmin/files/BSt/Publikationen/GrauePublikationen/Policy-Brief-Binnenmarkt-en_NW_02_2014.pdf

    Combine the two, and adjust for population growth, and what do you get?

    That the sum total improvement to our per capita GDP through the creation of the EU Single Market has been roughly the same as the improvement to our per capita GDP through natural growth of the UK economy over just 6 average months.

    And so far nothing has been said about the costs of the Single Market, which could very easily exceed its benefits – an aspect totally ignored in the Treasury analysis.

    When it comes down to it, the main reason for still staying in the EU Single Market when we leave the EU is that we are already in the EU Single Market and it would take more than couple of years to sort out the practical details of disentangling ourselves.

    • acorn
      Posted April 28, 2016 at 10:15 am | Permalink

      The growth problem is much more home grown, the EU has little to do with it. The UK has its own currency and the Stability and Growth Pact (pure neo-liberal nonsense), hasn’t stopped us spending it. Our own government has done that on its own. There are high levels of underemployment in the UK, which is reflected in the Real Wage Gap and GDP per capita PPP (see charts links following).

      Also the swing of national income towards capital and away from wages, particularly since the 2008 GFC, means there is less spending power in the economy. Public sector austerity and privatisations, are only the visible bit of what is going on.

      Reply The UK has half the level of unemployment of the Eurozone thanks to having our own currency and thanks to the economic policies we have pursued in recent years.

  38. Denis Cooper
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 2:59 pm | Permalink

    I see that the OECD has now taken its turn to warn that it would be a disaster if we left the EU, and just for good measure told us that we must continue with the demographic Ponzi scheme of mass immigration, because apparently it is good for us.

    • Ken Moore
      Posted April 27, 2016 at 8:23 pm | Permalink

      Advice from an organisation with ‘an astonishing record of failure’.. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/14e323ee-e602-11e3-aeef-00144feabdc0.html

      More Eu turkeys deciding not to vote for Christmas…

      • Denis Cooper
        Posted April 28, 2016 at 1:16 pm | Permalink

        But that article is from May 2014; I doubt that the FT would now print anything similarly disparaging about Osborne’s gallant ally.

  39. agricola
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 4:41 pm | Permalink

    Why does your leader choose to make such a prat of himself over how to pronounce the name of Nigel Farage. It is all rather pathetic playground stuff, but at the same time deeply offensive and unbecoming of a prime minister or anyone else for that matter. If this is the level his debate has sunk to he must be feeling very desperate. I notice he is not anxious to enter into one on one public debate with Nigel Farage because he suspects his remain argument is on very thin ice.

    • Ken Moore
      Posted April 27, 2016 at 11:04 pm | Permalink

      I think David Cameron confirmed he is a rather nasty piece of work quite unsuited to high office…. rather like his political twin Blair. His conduct during the referendum has been disgusting even by his own low standards….I can only hope his replacement will be markedly better.

  40. Margaret
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 5:49 pm | Permalink

    When you mean the growth rate it sound like population growth and the rights and responsibilities of those who not only settle here but continue to have large families paid for by the state. We cannot edit the numbers of people coming here and extending their families who are dependent on the state.
    The real argument is not solely about trade or taking control , but we are too frightened to express our views freely. Our roads are full, our schools are full, we cannot understand the many languages we need to at work and mistakes are made. Lets get real and say we are full up. If we followed Chinas example we would limit the number of children born to each family and cousins and sisters and in laws etc

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted April 28, 2016 at 1:11 pm | Permalink

      It was the birth rate dropping close to the death rate that triggered the reversal of UK government policy from “would-be zero” immigration to mass immigration.

      • Margaret
        Posted April 29, 2016 at 6:15 am | Permalink

        Extremes are not the answer. If we did not chase our own out of the country by refusing to give hem jobs then we would have the offspring . In my own family there are at least 10 children who could have made t here , children of Drs and businessmen and Nurses.

  41. Iain gill
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 8:22 pm | Permalink

    I see Mr trump has declared an “America first” foreign policy, maybe we need a UK first foreign policy?

  42. Beecee
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 9:10 pm | Permalink

    Am I right in remembering that last September Mr Cameron said that the UK could do very well outside of the EU if it had to? So why is it Apocalypse Now?

    Given how well briefed any Leave Campaigner would be if they read this blog – why are the front men making such a hash of it?

    Infiltration?

  43. Bazman
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 9:18 pm | Permalink

    Or Turkey Boris…

    • Bazman
      Posted April 27, 2016 at 9:18 pm | Permalink

      Or thick nonsense…

      • Bazman
        Posted April 27, 2016 at 9:19 pm | Permalink

        And Steel.

  44. Bazman
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 9:20 pm | Permalink

    Maybe aluminium. Not decided on that one yet.

  45. Bazman
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 9:34 pm | Permalink

    Hillsborough? I blame the BBC.

  46. miami.mode
    Posted April 27, 2016 at 11:54 pm | Permalink

    Have just seen Liam Fox on a re-run of the Daily Politics from Wednesday giving a spirited defence to the arguments that sundry organisations such as the BoE, OECD, IMF etc plus the American President and, indeed, our own Treasury all say we will be worse off with Brexit.

    The Leave HQ need to issue some sort of crib sheet that can show examples where each of these organisations has been wrong on a forecast so that interviewees can say that they were wrong on that occasion and are wrong now.

  47. Lindsay McDougall
    Posted April 28, 2016 at 8:44 pm | Permalink

    The Treasury ‘analysis’ suggests that if we Remain UK GDP will grow by 37% by 2020. That is an average annual compound growth rate over a 14 year period of 2.3%. If the calculation is done on simple interest principles, i.e taking an arithmetic average of the growth, the growth rate is 2.6%.

    Either way, these are preposterously large numbers. The historical avarage growth rate from 1979, with the decline of industry and the rise of the service economy, has been 2.0%.

    The Treasury reckons that if we Leave then GDP will grow by ‘only’ 29% by 2030. This gives per annum growth of 1.8% compound, 2.1% simple interest growth. These are much more plausible numbers.

    What are the Treasury team pinning their hopes on? Completion of the Single Market in services, that’s what. But the UK has been trying to persuade the European Commision to bring forward measures to implement a Single Market in services ever since the Maastricht Treaty became law in 1993, and it has got precisely nowhere. There are and always will be two major difficulties in selling services to other EU Member States (1) language differences and (2) the protectionist policies of nationalised corporations.

    A more rational cash flow calculation, for the first year after Brexit, is:
    – Elimination of cash payments to EU: Plus £14 billion
    – Payments by UK government to British farmers: Minus £2.5 billion
    – Additional revenue from fish after reclaiming our fishing waters: Plus £0.5 billion
    – Tariffs to EU countries on exports under a Canada style agreement: Minus £0.6 billion
    – Net change in cash flow one year after Brexit £11.4 billion

    And it gets better later when we complete new free trade deals.

  • 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