Getting out of the EU need not take long nor be difficult

The whole Remain establishment spends most of their time trying to invent more and more problems that they say will flow from a decision to leave. They tell us no country has ever done it, and argue it is almost impossible.

They lie, as they do about so much. Greenland left the EU without great hassle when she split from Denmark.

It is quite common for countries and big international groupings to break up. When a country splits far more has to be sorted out that we will need to deal with when leaving the EU. The currency, banking system and many common institutions have to be split, and the whole government divided. The Czech and Slovak peoples  achieved this well in a matter of months in 1992 when they decided they wanted to live in  individual countries. It took less than six months to get from the declared intent for independence to the legal separation of the two, with  transfer of assets and the  establishment of two new independent governments.

The break up of the USSR was also achieved quite quickly, despite the reluctance of many in the Russian dominated Soviet Union to cede power. Every country leaving set up its own currency, quitting the rouble bloc, and soon established functioning all purpose governments to replace the subsidiary administrations they had been allowed. They also had to introduce democracy at the same time. Each one became considerably more prosperous on leaving, despite losing the alleged advantage of a single currency and common trading system. It took under two years for the whole rouble bloc to be disbanded by the countries other than Russia each setting up their own money and quitting the zone. Political separation for any individual country was a swift process.

The  UK successfully helped pilot through independence in its imperial countries after 1945. Many of them went on to become more prosperous and to become successful democracies. India is the world’s largest democracy and the fastest growing major economy today thanks to her own efforts freed of foreign rule.

Singapore was expelled by the state of Malaysia in 1965 after just a year of political wrangling and protests. Some in Singapore were worried lest the state was too small to flourish alone, yet she  did so nonetheless and never looked back, rapidly becoming one the world’s wealthiest small countries.

So why do Remain have such a low opinion of the UK, that they think we cannot do much less than any of these had to do, and do it in a friendly, orderly and prompt manner? Why didn’t Singapore end up poorer or the Cech Republic encounter insuperable legal and trade obstacles, when it dared to leave Czechoslovakia? Name a single country that regrets leaving the USSR.

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

142 Comments

  1. DaveM
    Posted June 10, 2016 at 5:46 am | Permalink

    I don’t care if it takes 20 years as long as we’re out.

    • Hope
      Posted June 10, 2016 at 7:12 am | Permalink

      What interesting is that Cameron claimed he wanted a compassionate Conservative party while changing its nasty image. What does everyone in the Tory party think now about Cameron after his personal smears, smears on his own associations who worked tirelessly to get the party in office, talking Britain down, calling us little Englanders, remain silent when foreign leaders made threats to our country?

      It is now clear there is a smear campaign waged against Boris because he is popular and a good cause for leaving the EU. Osborne with his nasty innuendos, clambering to get support from any body and ready to give them his specious information from the Treasury, about not wanting a Farage Britain, when no such thing is on offer. Does anyone believe a word these two teacherous people say?

      What all Tory MPs should be asking is: do you want the two nasty posh boys who do not know the price of milk running the country and party? Their track record is appalling on pledges and delivery to the country.

    • sjb
      Posted June 10, 2016 at 10:15 am | Permalink

      Perhaps JR could share with us how long he thinks each stage of getting out of the EU would take. For example, would he start the Article 50 process immediately?

      Reply I would not use Article 50

      • Lifelogic
        Posted June 10, 2016 at 3:42 pm | Permalink

        I agree, we certainly should not use Article 50.

        • Jagman84
          Posted June 10, 2016 at 9:58 pm | Permalink

          Same here. Article 50/1 states “Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements”.

          • sjb
            Posted June 11, 2016 at 4:08 pm | Permalink

            @jagman84
            Indeed and if you read on you will see that having decided to withdraw the Member State is obliged to inform the European Council: see Art 50.2.

            As things stand, Article 50 is the only legal basis for leaving the EU.

            I know Vote Leave’s website states: ‘we may agree with the EU another path that is in both our interests.’ But like so much of the Leave campaign’s post-EU vista that rather depends on the other contracting party’s agreement, which I think in most (?all) cases has not – so far – been given.

          • bluedog
            Posted June 11, 2016 at 8:50 pm | Permalink

            SJB, if the British people express their view through a referendum that they wish to leave the EU there is currently no power within the EU that has the capacity to prevent that outcome. Legalistic determinations notwithstanding. It’s called democracy, a concept not widely understood or practiced by the EU.

  2. Roy Grainger
    Posted June 10, 2016 at 5:48 am | Permalink

    I fear it will be another country that shows us how simple it is to leave the EU.

    I wonder how the Conservative party will survive after this referendum with all the lies being peddled by their Remain campaign representatives – especially their leader and chancellor – Labour it seems are relatively united as they hardly seem to be bothered either way and are not campaigning hard.

    • Hope
      Posted June 10, 2016 at 7:18 am | Permalink

      I actually think we have come to see the lack of life experience the two posh have. Therefore they resort to nasty juvenile behaviour because they know no different and have never had to stand on their own two feet without the financial support from their parents. Political life for them is a rich boys game because it brings power and kudos. The selfish nasty streaks in their flawed characters will never disappear.

      • Jerry
        Posted June 10, 2016 at 9:07 am | Permalink

        @Hope; Oh dear, and you accuse others of having to “resort to nasty juvenile behaviour”. How about putting your the personal abuse to one side @Hope, try playing the ball and not the men in the other team?

        • Hope
          Posted June 10, 2016 at 4:11 pm | Permalink

          It is called highlighting their hypocrisy and giving balance to their tactics while they pretend otherwise. Normal drivel Jerry.

          • Jerry
            Posted June 11, 2016 at 2:11 pm | Permalink

            @Hope; No, its called engaging in personal abuse, what you did was centre in on something they had no control over, the fact that they have been born into rich families.

        • getahead
          Posted June 10, 2016 at 7:06 pm | Permalink

          Jerry, Hope is exactly right. The two schoolboys ‘running’ our country need to go.

        • Jagman84
          Posted June 10, 2016 at 10:01 pm | Permalink

          That’s rather rich, coming from you! They say that when you get flak from Jerry, you are close to the target (and truth).

          • Edward2
            Posted June 11, 2016 at 3:49 pm | Permalink

            As one of Jerry’s prime targets I obviously agree!

          • Jerry
            Posted June 11, 2016 at 8:36 pm | Permalink

            @Edward2; Then stop trying to play the man, read what I have actually said and then debate those points, not my shins! You (also) have a tendency to jump in with both feet simply because I have said something that your particular flavour of capitalism doesn’t like, not because what I said is materially incorrect.

          • Edward2
            Posted June 12, 2016 at 9:39 am | Permalink

            Do calm down Jerry
            It wasn’t meant to be taken as seriously as you have.
            I was trying to be witty.
            Not obviously enough it seems

          • Jerry
            Posted June 12, 2016 at 11:54 am | Permalink

            @Edward2; “I was trying to be witty. Not obviously enough it seems”

            It helps, when talking via text, to add a basic clue if you are trying to be funny, sarcastic or what ever, words are not always enough, that is why some bright IT boffin’s invented the use of “emoticons” – for example, 🙂

            Saves a lot of misunderstanding, never mind our hosts time!…

          • Edward2
            Posted June 12, 2016 at 6:58 pm | Permalink

            Being less with it than you Jerry I use the exclamation mark
            But I will take your advice

      • alan.
        Posted June 10, 2016 at 12:15 pm | Permalink

        Hope

        Perfectly outlined, they have a complete misunderstanding of the human nature of ordinary people.

        You don’t know how the ordinary people of this Country live, unless you have been there.

      • Lifelogic
        Posted June 10, 2016 at 3:48 pm | Permalink

        I tend to think the problem is that they are just totally out of touch with ordinary people. People who cannot get a home, an appointment at the GP, have their pay undercut by workers living four to a room, have to wait for hours at A&E, sit in long traffic jams, pay huge taxes, do not get tax free expenses or gold plated pensions, cannot get their children in the local school they want, are the victims of crime that the police are not even investigating……….

    • Horatio McSherry
      Posted June 10, 2016 at 7:51 am | Permalink

      Cheer up mate! That kind of mentality won’t do!

      Remember the run up to the 2012 Olympics? All you heard was that we weren’t good enough; that we’re bound to make a mess of it; the transport will embarrass us; the organisation will crumble; we’ll be a laughing stock; we couldn’t possibly compete with the wonderful Sydney Olympics, or the grandeur of Beijing; everyone would enjoy the once great country falling in front of the whole world.

      And what happened? It’s been universally recognised as the greatest Olympics there’s ever been. From the competition, to the organisation, to the spectacle, to the atmosphere. And more importantly, it lifed the country and turned us from merchants of doom and gloom into being confident and pround, and a feeling of: “You know what? If we want to, and when we put our minds to it, we’re pretty damn good at stuff!”

      So come on. Less of the pessimism. If you don’t believe in yourself, who else will? 🙂

      • hefner
        Posted June 10, 2016 at 4:12 pm | Permalink

        Thanks for that bit of fresh air.

      • fedupsoutherner
        Posted June 10, 2016 at 6:00 pm | Permalink

        Horatio. Problem we have is our current leaders don’t have any confidence in the people of this country. As you say, when we want to do something we get behind and get it done. We have a history of success stories and our sense of pride in our nation will see us through whatever life throws at us. It’s always been the way and we can do without our politicians running the country down. I have read and heard so much rubbish and scaremongering that I take none of it seriously anymore and indeed, tend to switch off the radio or TV when they start up. Life Logic is right in what he says, but it is the spineless leaders we have that are the problem and not the people! So I wholeheartedly agree with the both of you.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted June 10, 2016 at 8:30 am | Permalink

      Cameron has indeed been very foolish with his project fear and project lies. He should have stayed above it all. Osborne is a disaster but a huge help to leave every time he speaks. As too are the disasters Blair and Major with their implied threats of new & violent troubles in Ireland. Blair largely caused much of the migration problems with his war on lie. Major seems to want to try to bury the Tories for many terms for a second time. We have heard more than enough from him.

      I see that we actually had for once three leavers and two remainers on Question Time last night. But then of course Dimbleby did his very best for the remain side too as one would expect of the BBC.

      Why on earth do they have Eddie Izzard on? All the man did was to talk drivel endlessly across anyone talking on the leave side. The man is not even funny with it. He is even worse that the rest of the dire BBC lefties (Billie Bragg types) they dig out from the entertainment industries to talk drivel.

      A one point Dimbleby said “We try to avoid pantomime on this programme”. If so why do they invite people like Eddie Izzard on? He claimed migrants put more in than they take out, some clearly do, but most are on low pay and certainly do not.

      We need to take the best and limit the rest. We can only do this post Brexit.

      • Horatio
        Posted June 10, 2016 at 4:22 pm | Permalink

        You answered your own question. Izzard was put on to talk over Farage and destroy the discussion about immigration , which is leave’s strongest weapon. I note that the screaming harpies on the itv debate also screeched over the leave side during the discussion on immigration.

        Dimbleby’s bias gets ever more pathetic and obvious everyday, his moderation was typified by tough questions to leavers and a studied absence of control. Disgusting. I expect exactly the same next time there are 3 leavers on. No sign of Dan Hannan being allowed on the main TV debates, far too effective and we’ll briefed. More Andrea Leadsom would be good too.

      • fedupsoutherner
        Posted June 10, 2016 at 6:03 pm | Permalink

        LifeLogic. Agree. Dimbleby did a rubbish job of controlling Izzard last night who looked like something (etc ed). He was allowed to interrupt Farage all the time and then Dimbleby had the cheek to say to Farage that he should hurry up and answer the question!! The man is a nuisance or should I say they were both a damn nuisance last night.

    • eeyore
      Posted June 10, 2016 at 10:46 am | Permalink

      Panicky noises from Labour this morning. They’re peddling In on the doorstep and getting thick ears for their pains. They want to talk about the economy and employment rights but they’re hearing immigration from the masses Oop North. Labour polled upward of 10m at the GE – how many will now vote Leave?

      I assumed it would be a quarter or third, but let’s be bold and claim 40% – 4m. The back-of-envelope arithmetic now goes:

      Electorate 46m. Expected turnout c.60% or 28m. Winning post is therefore 14m.

      For Leave: Ukippers – 4m; say up to half of 11.5m Tories – 5.5m; Labour say 4m; say a sixth of Scots – 1m. Total for Leave 14.5m.

      You can still get 11-4 against Brexit.

      • Lifelogic
        Posted June 10, 2016 at 3:50 pm | Permalink

        Indeed 11:4 is surely still a bargain but I got 9:2.

      • Narrow Shoulders
        Posted June 10, 2016 at 6:11 pm | Permalink

        Bookies think it will be a high turnout and fewer than 50% Tories will vote Brexit

  3. zorro
    Posted June 10, 2016 at 5:51 am | Permalink

    Absolutely, the Remain arguments are mainly absurd. We even had Steven Timms the other day suggesting that Brits might need visas to visit France/Germany. This in the context of Turkey becoming visa free and countless other countries no needing visas for the EU….. Utterly bonkers!

    However….. After the ITV debate last night I am very happy with the way the Leave team destroyed the Remain team on every level. Boris was er… Boris, but I was very impressed with the appearance and arguments of Andrea Leadsom and Gisela Stuart, two clearly educated and sensible people with a thorough knowledge of their subject area.

    They were so much better on every level than the truly awful and dreadful trio of Sturgeon, Eagle and Rudd….. That performance must have given Leave a couple of extra million votes!

    With regards to QT, can someone please tell what is the point of Eddie Izzard? And why do people keep going on about the £350m figure, is it really that difficult to understand? I do despair sometimes.

    zorro ?

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted June 10, 2016 at 6:50 am | Permalink

      Eddie Izzard was brought in by the BBC production team to disrupt contributions from Nigel Farage, that is why he was seated right next to him so that he could more easily interrupt him and lean forward and gesticulate and shout into his face. And then the BBC employee acting as the completely impartial chairman could step in and upbraid Nigel Farage and ask him to be quiet, rather than asking Eddie Izzard to either shut up and wait his turn or leave the panel. It was a disgrace, but then that is what we have come to expect from the broadcasters, and not just the BBC.

      • zorro
        Posted June 10, 2016 at 5:33 pm | Permalink

        Indeed – Several members of the audience told him to button it and stop interrupting Farage. Izzard was unable to articulate anything except wave his hands in a peculiar fashion, and gibber incoherently about ‘the future’ and his marathon running which has clearly affected the oxygen supply to his brain….

        Well done to Leadsom and Stuart again (and Boris for flicking his hair) who wiped the floor with the bizarre trio on the other side 😉

        zorro

        zorro

      • Edward2
        Posted June 10, 2016 at 6:45 pm | Permalink

        Absolutely right Denis
        The QT people knew exactly what they were doing.

    • Know-dice
      Posted June 10, 2016 at 7:18 am | Permalink

      Amber Rudd says you should always believe the advice from experts, “you wouldn’t build a bridge without consulting an engineer” – remind me Amber your qualifications for being Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change

      Edinburgh University where she read history.

      Nicola Sturgeon – still pulling money from the “magic money tree” how much is it? £1600 per person per year more than English residents from the block grant. And now you have tax raising powers, how come you are not using them?

      QT the less said the better – I did think that Chris Grayling comes across well as a calm logical speaker.

      • Lifelogic
        Posted June 10, 2016 at 11:10 am | Permalink

        Well if they really are experts and if they are genuine and acting in the interests of the public – rather under government instruction or their own personal career or income interests.

        Alas we have too many “experts” who beleive in magic money tree economics, climate alarmism, ever higher taxation, ever more cycling and trains, central wage controls, government knows best, command economics, sugar taxes,ever more EU, less and less democracy and endless other complete & damaging tosh.

        Many “experts” are alas driven by where the research grants are to be found.

        • Lifelogic
          Posted June 10, 2016 at 11:29 am | Permalink

          Not to mention the PC drivel and the “equality religion” purveyors and “experts”.

        • Lifelogic
          Posted June 10, 2016 at 3:52 pm | Permalink

          Or driven by fashion and group think.

      • Lifelogic
        Posted June 10, 2016 at 11:27 am | Permalink

        If Natalie Bennett had consulted solid energy/engineering experts on energy efficiency before she appeared in front of bike rather than a Blue Mini like Cameron, Labour and the LibDims they could have explained to her how a full Mini is actually far more energy efficient than five people are on bikes.

        Far safer, more convenient and quicker too.

        Bikes fueled as they often are by extra intakes of steak, claret and chips which has to be produced, frozen, transported, cooked, packaged etc.

        Small wheeled bikes, like the one she chose, are also far less energy efficient that larger wheeled ones generally.

        Still why let real science get in the way of the green religion?

        • hefner
          Posted June 10, 2016 at 4:25 pm | Permalink

          As a proud owner of a Mini, I cannot say I dispense from steaks, claret or chips. So my children on their bikes to school or universities eating few steaks, some chips, but certainly no claret (at least in front of me) are likely to be “more efficient” than I am, “energy/engineering” speaking.

          So I would not take your contribution as any addition to “real science”. But so few of those are!

          • Lifelogic
            Posted June 11, 2016 at 6:00 pm | Permalink

            Five people cycling are far less efficient (in co2 emission terms) than 5 people in a mini. Just do the sums! Think of the wind resistance on five bikes for a start.

            Also far more likely to die or be injured in the process.

        • hefner
          Posted June 10, 2016 at 5:35 pm | Permalink

          As a proud owner of a Mini, I cannot say I dispense from steaks, claret or chips. So my children on their bikes to school or universities eating fewer steaks, some chips, but certainly no claret (at least in front of me) are likely to be “more efficient” than I am, “energy/engineering” speaking.

          So I would not take your contribution as any addition to “real science”. But so few of those are!

          • hefner
            Posted June 12, 2016 at 6:38 am | Permalink

            I would guess the five people are breathing roughly the same way whether cycling or seating in a Mini. As far as I know, riding a bike does not produce CO2 from any engine, whereas the Mini is very unlikely to run on fresh air so will release some exhaust gases. There is a difference between the total of joules used up and in that sense you might be right in terms of the scientific definition of energy/work needed to counter the wind resistance but you are certainly wrong in terms of the induced pollution or potential health benefits by the two different means of transport.

    • DaveM
      Posted June 10, 2016 at 7:27 am | Permalink

      Ha ha. The only thing I got from QT last night (apart from Chris Grayling perpetuating the sober factual approach on behalf of Leave) was that Eddie Izzard is a total ( word left out ed)

      • Anonymous
        Posted June 10, 2016 at 7:48 pm | Permalink

        Dave

        I am sick of the whole Marie Antoinette pro-EU London elite and their court jesters.

        They are ALL (word left out ed)

    • Lifelogic
      Posted June 10, 2016 at 8:38 am | Permalink

      Indeed, Izzard had nothing sensible to say, yet he just would not let anyone from the leave side say anything – without talking endlessly through them. Just one of the many BBC half baked, lefties (usually from the “entertainment” industries) that they like to invite on endlessly. This to keep the BBC on the leftie, magic money tree, pro EU and climate alarmist agenda.

    • Jerry
      Posted June 10, 2016 at 9:29 am | Permalink

      @zorro; Sorry but Mr Timms was correct (if there is no waver scheme), and it is a blot on the Brexit copy-book for not explaining these facts, that having to apply for a visa doesn’t stop people travelling, even living or working in another country. What is more, is it not what the Brexit side want, how else will we police the wish to limit the number of eastern Europeans working illegally or otherwise in this country if we have not imposed some form of visa requirement ourselves?

      • Patrick Geddes
        Posted June 10, 2016 at 5:31 pm | Permalink

        If they are illegal the visa scheme is irrelevant.

      • zorro
        Posted June 10, 2016 at 5:41 pm | Permalink

        Jerry – no Timms is an intelligent man who was making a ridiculous statement. In which parallel universe do you think that the EU will impose a visa regime on the UK when there has not been one before?

        Iceland, USA, Canada etc etc (and soon Albania and Turkey) – no need for visas…. OK so let’s impose one on the UK to whom we send our unemployed and export mega sums….. As the French should say, your agument is ‘pour les oiseaux’ 😉

        zorro

        • Jerry
          Posted June 11, 2016 at 2:26 pm | Permalink

          @zorro; But Brexit wish to impose one, how else will we be able to keep those Europeans out we do not wish to have in the country for what ever reason – some people on the Brexit side seem to think that the EU will be bending over backwards to accept an asymmetrical visa treaty, why would they, what advantage is it to them?

          Oh and if wee need to allow free movement, visa less travel, to have free trade between other countries…

          • zorro
            Posted June 12, 2016 at 7:21 pm | Permalink

            They really can be the EUSSR then demanding visas off everyone! ?

            zorro

      • Anonymous
        Posted June 10, 2016 at 7:52 pm | Permalink

        Jerry – So what ?

      • Patrick Geddes
        Posted June 11, 2016 at 8:17 am | Permalink

        When in the last hundred years did European nations require any visas to travel?
        A passport or some ID is all that has been required.
        It requires a big stretch of imagination to think that European nations will introduce Visa requirements on UK citizens if we become independent of the EU.
        You will say it could happen and put the word could in bold
        I will say it won’t but that pigs might fly
        With the word might in bold.

        • Jerry
          Posted June 11, 2016 at 2:33 pm | Permalink

          @Patrick Geddes; The point is, some wanting a Brexit wish to impose visa requirements, how else can we limit who enters the UK and for what reasons? See my reply to @zorro.

          • zorro
            Posted June 11, 2016 at 3:57 pm | Permalink

            Jerry, it’s not a question of who we allow to visit but who we allow to stay. There are many countries that do not need visas to enter Schengen or the UK. We will have the power to decide who can stay/be a resident. No more residency on ‘free movement’ grounds. No spurious benefit claiming either. No resisting removal/deportation on spurious grounds. We just need a government to enforce it.

            zorro

          • Edward2
            Posted June 11, 2016 at 5:44 pm | Permalink

            When have Brexit said they want to bring in Visas?
            More project fear twaddle.

          • Jerry
            Posted June 11, 2016 at 8:51 pm | Permalink

            @zorro; @Edward2; Tell me, how many illegal over stayers we have in the UK currently, and most of those did at one time have visas, how the hell are we going to know which European nationals (still, at the time of checking) have a right to stay and/or work and those that do not if there is no visa paperwork?!

            Seems to me @Edward2 that, on this at least, it has been some on the Brexit side who have been talking “twaddle” if they think that visas are not going to be a part of the solution they seek.

          • Edward2
            Posted June 12, 2016 at 9:41 am | Permalink

            Not answering the acual question.

          • Jerry
            Posted June 12, 2016 at 12:01 pm | Permalink

            @Edward; I have, but I can’t help if you do not like the given answer.

          • zorro
            Posted June 12, 2016 at 7:24 pm | Permalink

            Jerry, you can get an arrival stamp in a country which will say if you have permission to work/be a like USA nationals coming to the UK. If you want to work in the UK you could apply for a work permit – not difficult really.

            zorro

          • Jerry
            Posted June 12, 2016 at 9:19 pm | Permalink

            @zorro; Oh you mean a bit like what happens at the Spanish/Gibraltar border, with long lines of people waiting to be processed…

    • Atlas
      Posted June 10, 2016 at 10:11 am | Permalink

      Zorro,

      I agree about the debate and like you felt that the whole Leave team gave a good account of themselves.

      It was interesting watching N. Sturgeon in action when faced with women debaters. I can only conclude that the Scottish Labour Party must have been truly dire.

      As for Blair and Major trying to stir things up in Northern Ireland – well the less said the better. We have had an open border to Irish citizens from Southern Ireland in both its Irish Free State days as well as is Republic of Ireland days, so why would that change on Brexit?

      • zorro
        Posted June 10, 2016 at 5:44 pm | Permalink

        I think that it will be seen as a pivotal moment in the presentation of the campaign. What on earth the Leave campaign thought when parading that trio before the public God knows…..!

        By the way, allegedly Theresa May was last seen in a dinghy heading for Turkey hence explaining her non-appearance on our screens 😉

        zorro

        • zorro
          Posted June 11, 2016 at 2:30 pm | Permalink

          I mean Remain camp parading the trio of course!

          zorro

          • Jerry
            Posted June 12, 2016 at 9:22 pm | Permalink

            @zorro, You were correct the first time!

            BSE has (probably, more than likely) lost this referendum, more than Vote Leave having won it…

      • Anonymous
        Posted June 10, 2016 at 7:51 pm | Permalink

        Atlas – the problem is that the news round-up showed the Remain side winning through clever editing. Ditto many other clashes I have seen on TV.

    • Dennis
      Posted June 10, 2016 at 11:38 am | Permalink

      That £350 million figure. Can it be squashed by saying to critics…

      If you think this is viable, say ….

      ” Do you know that no one in the UK pays any income tax, council tax, VAT or any other tax?

      Because it all comes back as a rebate in the form of roads, hospitals, schools, the Navy, Air Force, Army, nuclear submarines, running the government etc., etc.”

      Will they get the point?

  4. CHRISTOPHER HOUSTON
    Posted June 10, 2016 at 5:54 am | Permalink

    Givcn the Bookies’ odds and Poll statistics for Brexit, which is down on we leaving the EU, it is confusing why Remainers seem so hysterical. They personally attack Boris. But their instinct for survival must indicate personal attacks don’t work. They must know something we don’t.
    One thing: whatever the outcome: there are too many patriots, here, for the EU to procreate.
    We need to cut ties with the EU soon. Any delay will create anger and be counter-productive.
    Might be a good time for the Remainder MPs to retire.

    • Chris
      Posted June 10, 2016 at 11:58 am | Permalink

      I think that what they know/have come to realise is that the people that they were relying to vote Remain are apparently not necessarily going to e.g. many Labour voters, young people, and women (who they have stereotyped as anti Farage – an error indeed). This is only impression I am getting from articles on the blogosphere. This has induced panic as they really thought they had it sewn up. Who knows, they might still succeed, but rash as it might seem, I think that it is possible that the Remain camp may be heading for 40 to 45% of the vote.
      Nigel Farage/UKIP have been campaigning up and down the country for the Referendum for some considerable time, having started early, as Farage thought that Cameron was going to call an early referendum, unlike quite a few other commentators. Also, obviously Farage and his team were campaigning for the last election and the European elections, so there was a good solid base there already before this campaign started. I believe that has paid dividends, and deservedly so.

  5. Dame Rita Webb
    Posted June 10, 2016 at 5:57 am | Permalink

    JR you need to brush up you knowledge of the collapse of the Soviet Union. For those of us who around that manor at the time we will tell you something different. Like war in Nagorno Karabakh and the Fergana Valley. A massacre in Vilnius. One of the world’s highest rates of inflation in the Ukraine. Thats before we even talk about the area becoming an incubator for organised crime that is making its presence felt in the UK as we speak.

    • Dame Rita Webb
      Posted June 10, 2016 at 6:01 am | Permalink

      Just to answer your last question …. the Trans-Dinistrian Republic and Abkhazia would also like to be re-unified with Russia. While for anybody who likes to do a bit of time travel Belarus is worth a visit. It still has its own KGB, collective farms and is recognised as the last dictatorship in Europe.

      • Hope
        Posted June 10, 2016 at 7:20 am | Permalink

        And the U.K. Gave the dictator £1 billion in overseas aid!

      • Mitchel
        Posted June 10, 2016 at 12:25 pm | Permalink

        As I understand it,The Central Asian Republics,being economic dependencies,were not keen on total independence either;to some extent they were thrown out of the nest!

  6. CHRISTOPHER HOUSTON
    Posted June 10, 2016 at 6:07 am | Permalink

    Of course there are things going on in the financial world which undermine the Remain campaign. The EU “project” is finished. Naturally the careers of Remaindians too.
    There are still allotments where they can grow potatoes, green beans, radishes and prize winning marrows and, in local Shows they may still make something of themselves.

  7. Richard1
    Posted June 10, 2016 at 6:42 am | Permalink

    There is an excellent article in Standpoint by the economist Tim Congdon explaining why true free trade is the best option. Neither Hong Kong nor Simgapore impose any external tariffs as the EU does. Both are of course also low tax / small govt countries (albeit authoritarian). My question over Brexit is whether there would be any majority in the UK for free market liberalism. The large majority of people supporting Brexit, it seems, are motivated by an understandable desire to limit immigration, not by opposition to the EUs top down dirigisme. What would be a disaster is Brexit followed by 1970s style protectionism, interventionism and tax/borrow/spend policies!

    • Anonymous
      Posted June 10, 2016 at 7:54 pm | Permalink

      Richard 1 – What would be a disaster would be more EU economies failing and Britain being made to pick up the bills.

  8. Denis Cooper
    Posted June 10, 2016 at 7:01 am | Permalink

    JR, I know that it is off this topic but please could I just post this link:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_rebate

    so that people can understand why the UK’s rebate is not an up-front discount each year but instead a refund of money overpaid in the previous year(s).

    It is a system which is not just overly complex but fundamentally daft, and it seems to me that it is symptomatic of the EU’s malaise that it has now been running for over thirty years without the EU getting round to reforming the way that budget contributions are calculated so that they would be seen as fair to all its member states without any member state needing to be specially compensated for overpayment year after year.

    • zorro
      Posted June 10, 2016 at 6:08 pm | Permalink

      I truly despair of people’s inability to understand this simple concept – If you want to join my club, you must give me 20 bananas, and next year I will give you 5 back and I want you to put these 5 other bananas which I will give back to you from your contribution on your dining table with my name on and some kisses to show how good I am and that is it…. (It’s none of your business what happens to the other 10 so don’t ask 🙂 …..)

      zorro

  9. Ian Wragg
    Posted June 10, 2016 at 7:07 am | Permalink

    I see the tactics of Remain seemed to backfire last night. Playing the man and not the ball.
    The Remainiacs have nothing positive to say about Britain. Just endless bilge.
    According to Cameron having spent 8 years in the Royal Navy much of the time under the Barents Sea I’m a little englander and quitter.
    For gods sake get shot of him.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted June 10, 2016 at 8:43 am | Permalink

      Every time Cameron says “little Englanders and quitters”, or lies that we “have control of our borders” or says “no if no buts” or his is “at heart a low tax Conservative”, or “a reformed EU” he surely helps the leave vote hugely.

    • dame rita webb
      Posted June 10, 2016 at 10:05 am | Permalink

      Because we are not allowed to ask him about his personal conduct before he entered politics. I think we can safely assume, because of certain lifestyle issues , Dave would have had any application to join the armed forces rejected. Consider yourself to be a far greater man than he will ever be.

  10. agricola
    Posted June 10, 2016 at 7:27 am | Permalink

    Given what there is too loose on both sides from a fractious EU divorce, you are quite right to point out how easy it can be. Given the quality of the politicians involved however I think it will be a messy divorce.

    The Remain trio on ITV last night, reminiscent of the opening scene of the Scottish play, were both dishonest and mathematically illiterate. They prated on about the accuracy of the £350 Million on the Leave bus like delirious torpedoed seamen spotting a tropical island. Be the figure higher or lower it is nevertheless a gross amount. Take off the Abatement (Tax Allowance), Take off payments to favoured UK organisations at the discretion of the EU (Bribes), and you are left with a net payment of between £8 and £10 Billion which we will never see again (Tax for the privilege of being an EU member). How stupid do Remain have to be not to understand this.

    The trio of Amber Rudd, Angela Eagle, and Nicola Sturgeon did more for Leave than they intended by not having anything positive to say and not knowing when to shut up. By contrast Leave were represented by a logical, sensible and temperate trio comprising Andrea Leadsom, Gisela Stuart, and lone male Boris. They all espoused sensible argument in the face of the harangue from remain. There was no polling of the audience so it was hard to judge their reaction .

    The gathering , with one exception, of couch potatoes for post broadcast comment was lamentable. They hardly had a coherent thought between them. I thought ITV did a very poor job. Five women and one man on the panel, a weak hostess, and a useless follow up.

    Amber Rudd managed to seal her future political career when referring to Boris Johnson as “Not the man you would wish to drive you home”, or words to that effect. All credit to Boris that he assuaged my immediate repost of “Let the woman walk”. He was very restrained and in doing so gathered much respect.

  11. Gary C
    Posted June 10, 2016 at 7:46 am | Permalink

    I had to chuckle with this one:

    “and soon established functioning all purpose governments”

    Looking at Cameron and Osborne that could be a problem for us !

  12. Denis Cooper
    Posted June 10, 2016 at 8:17 am | Permalink

    I don’t know why the specific period of two years was selected to go into the text of the “exit clause”, Article 50 TEU; your fellow Leave campaigner Gisela Stuart may know, JR, because as I recall she was on the Convention on the Future of Europe when that clause with that specific time period first appeared, as Article 59 in the draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe, back in June 2003:

    http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:OJ.C_.2003.169.01.0001.01.ENG&toc=OJ:C:2003:169:TOC

    “Article 59 Voluntary withdrawal from the Union”

    “3. The Constitution shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, decides to extend this period.”

    But it is perfectly clear from the wording that Valéry Giscard d’Estaing and the relevant Convention working party anticipated that the process of withdrawal could take LESS than two years.

    Only “failing that” does the two year period become relevant, with the option of either extending the period for negotiation, by mutual consent, or just terminating the existing treaty or constitution without any new treaty being ready to take its place.

    Personally I see no reason to differ from the original view of the Convention, or perhaps that of Valéry Giscard d’Estaing and his small coterie; in fact I could imagine it taking only weeks to get a basic deal which would make it possible for the UK to leave the EU without any risk of disruption to trade, no global economic meltdown or World War Three or return of the Black Death, with the many and varied subsidiary matters then being sorted out more gradually by virtue of Article 8(2) TEU:

    http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:OJ.C_.2016.202.01.0001.01.ENG&toc=OJ:C:2016:202:TOC

    “1. The Union shall develop a special relationship with neighbouring countries, aiming to establish an area of prosperity and good neighbourliness, founded on the values of the Union and characterised by close and peaceful relations based on cooperation.

    2. For the purposes of paragraph 1, the Union may conclude specific agreements with the countries concerned. These agreements may contain reciprocal rights and obligations as well as the possibility of undertaking activities jointly. Their implementation shall be the subject of periodic consultation.”

    Which, incidentally, closely replicates Article 56 in the draft EU Constitution.

  13. Bert Young
    Posted June 10, 2016 at 8:19 am | Permalink

    I can’t conceive any difficulty on “leaving” ; we will wake up with the same bodies , do the same chores , catch the bus or train and look at the same people over the garden fence . Strangely enough the air we breathe will be there . Jobs will not disappear , banks will be open and the cash stills working – even the petrol pumps will function .

    Those who think that it will be necessary to go through some sort of negotiating purdah period before we sell a car or make a pharmaceutical pill are in cloud cuckoo land . The products and services we make and provide now to the world markets will still want those things continued ; those on the receiving end will continue their lives just as we do .

    The one thing that can and must happen is the immediate cut-off of the cheque to Brussels ; once that happens let us just see what happens to the pleas that will come from the defunct and broke EU and Euro system ; it is then that we will re-discover a dignity and independence that we cannot feel now . The money markets will flood to safe havens and to those places who can and have always honoured their debts ; we have nothing to fear .

    • zorro
      Posted June 10, 2016 at 6:15 pm | Permalink

      Indeed, the only thing that would stop the normal conduct of business is a deliberate sabotage of economic policy by unpatriotic individuals. You will notice that I am not discounting this possibility…. 🙁

      zorro

  14. Lifelogic
    Posted June 10, 2016 at 9:30 am | Permalink

    Why do remain has such a low opinion of the UK?

    Why indeed? Great Britain need to takes its place in the wide world again. Restore Westminster based democracy with politicians we can elect and can remove and make Britain Great again. Cooperation with, rule by, break up into regions and serfdom.

    What a disappointment Hillary Benn is, relative to his father, on this issue. Yet another dire lefty, an anti-democratic career politician who clearly holds the voters in contempt.

    • zorro
      Posted June 10, 2016 at 6:17 pm | Permalink

      Tony Benn always said that he was very proud of his son…. He will still be turning in his grave at some of the arguments he has recently been using though.

      zorro

    • Anonymous
      Posted June 10, 2016 at 8:16 pm | Permalink

      Tony Benn disliked the EU.

      It’s not a left or right issue.

  15. Ian Wragg
    Posted June 10, 2016 at 9:49 am | Permalink

    I read the Richard North blog but am banned from contributing and he only promotes his Flexcit document. The big problem is with that is going for the Norway option means that this will be seen like Cameron and his mates as the end game. Continuing our bloated contribution, accepting free movement and obeying all the dicktats.
    Membership by another name.
    This would be totally rejected by the voters.
    As you say a quick exit is needed.

  16. Michael James
    Posted June 10, 2016 at 9:58 am | Permalink

    I was amused to read this in The Times (Business) today (10 June):

    ‘ Fears over a possible Brexit also pushed investors towards the safe haven of sovereign debt. . . The price of benchmark 10-year gilts rose, sending their yield, a good measure of the Treasury’s future borrowing costs, to as low as 1.22 per cent yesterday. That compares with 2 per cent a year ago and 8 per cent 20 years ago.’

    Weren’t we assured that Brexit would make interest rates rise?

  17. graham1946
    Posted June 10, 2016 at 10:02 am | Permalink

    Why do the Remainers have such a low opinion of the UK?

    Probably judging by their own low standards.

    We have such poor politicians, it is pretty clear that a lot of them cannot contemplate government without being told what to do. We had it in the last parliament, when CMD was overjoyed to have Nick Clegg hold his hand and I truly feel that he was devastated when the Tories won a majority and he had to deliver on the referendum.
    What a mess he has made of government since May 2015. He took months riding round Europe, ostensibly ‘negotiating’, actually avoiding any real governing and what he did ‘negotiate’ could have been done in an afternoon. All he did was just an Oliver Twist ‘Please Sir can I have some more? No? Oh alright then’.

  18. forthurst
    Posted June 10, 2016 at 10:20 am | Permalink

    The main lie of the Remain campaign is that we would spend decades negotiating access to the Single Market and that we would have to pay all sorts of penalties to achieve that, including the continuance of free movement of persons and of our money to Brussels for the privilege of maintaining a massive and increasing credit account deficit with them whilst the the Remainiacs know perfectly well that almost all European countries outside the EU already have tarriff free access without having to belong to the Single Market.

    People only have to believe leaving the EU will not be an economic catastrophe for Leaving to win hands down.

    Once we are outside the EU, watching the Eurozone collapse will be great fun.

    • miami.mode
      Posted June 10, 2016 at 9:37 pm | Permalink

      A bit disappointed with your last sentence there forthurst. The majority of readers and commenters on this site would probably like to see the EU go out of existence and if it does it will most likely be its poorest members and people who will suffer most.

      The UK generally has some sympathy for those least able to look after themselves and I’m sure will do everything possible to relieve any suffering.

      • forthurst
        Posted June 11, 2016 at 5:40 pm | Permalink

        As JR opines, reverting to a native currency is no big deal, except of course for the authors of the Euro failed experiment. The collapse of the Euro will yield the renaissance of real economies and currencies and the demise of the fantasists in Brussels.

  19. William Long
    Posted June 10, 2016 at 10:56 am | Permalink

    Cameron derides those that want to Leave as ‘Quitters’ and praises those who would remain as ‘Fighters’. Can anyone tell me why it is of any benefit to stay part of an organisation that by Cameron’s definition one one would have to be perpetually fighting?

  20. Dennis
    Posted June 10, 2016 at 11:23 am | Permalink

    JR you said – “They lie, as they do about so much. Greenland left the EU without great hassle when she split from Denmark.”

    You seem to be taking a leaf out of the Remainers by being economical with the truth…

    Greenland voted to leave the EU’s predecessor, the European Economic Community (EEC), in 1985 (Not the EU)
    Greenland chose to leave the EU predecessor without also seceding from a member state. It initially voted against joining the EEC when Denmark joined in 1973, but because Denmark as a whole voted to join, Greenland, as a part of Denmark, joined too. When home rule for Greenland began in 1979, it held a new referendum and voted to leave the EEC. After wrangling over fishing rights, the territory left the EEC in 1985, but remains subject to the EU treaties through association of Overseas Countries and Territories with the EU.

  21. Sakara Gold
    Posted June 10, 2016 at 11:24 am | Permalink

    There are three powerfull reasons why I’m personally in favour of remaining in the EU. Firstly, since you have brought Russia into the discussion, are you unaware that Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin has spoken out strongly in favour of Leave? And yesterday it was reported in the Telegraph that once again this week a Russian kilo class hunter-killer submarine ran the Channel. Last year a Russian fleet did the same thing and carried out a 4 day amphibious assault exercise 7 miles off Devenport. The Navy’s response? All they could do was to send a River class gunboat to “keep them under surveillance”

    Secondly, if we leave, it seems likely that the Tory party will subject itself to a period of internecine warfare which mayl result in Boris Johnson forming a government with his poodles Michael Gove and Liam Fox. To refresh your memory, Foxy when Defence Secretary scrapped our own Nimrod replacement, the last Tornado F3 air defence fighters capable of intercepting Russian Tupolev long range bombers over the Baltic Sea – and who did incalculable damage to the British Army with his unbelievably stupid Army 2020 program. No wonder Putin wants him back in government!

    And thirdly, leaving may well result in another Scottish independence referendum and the destruction of the Union. Good grief Leavers, have you really thought this through? Even Barack Obama wants us to remain!
    reply NATO us our defence alliance which includes the powerful USA. The EU cannot deal with Russia without the USA.
    Mr Foxs proposals were demanded by Mr Cameron and R Osborne who wanted lower defence spending than Dr Fox or I
    Polls show fewer Scots now wish to leave the UK than in the referendum the SNP lost

    • Roy Grainger
      Posted June 10, 2016 at 5:19 pm | Permalink

      And if the vote is to Remain Boris will be the next PM too. The Tory leader is voted for by the members and they are 70% or thereabouts for Leave – you think they’ll allow Osborne to take over ?

    • LondonBob
      Posted June 10, 2016 at 7:54 pm | Permalink

      Oh if Putin supports leave then count me in for leave. Thanks I was remain but now you have pointed out President Putin’s position I know which way to vote.

    • Anonymous
      Posted June 10, 2016 at 8:26 pm | Permalink

      Sakar Gold – All those things will have been of our own volition.

      This is not a general election as Remainers keep trying to imply. The people can reject Boris Johnson or elect him afterwards – the important thing is that it is their choice and it will be a relevant choice if we Leave, an irrelevant one if we Remain.

      Scottish independence ?

      They ought to accept that they chose to be British and that together we shall decide to either to Remain or Leave the EU – a decision which should be stuck with for better or for worse. It is a bit of a cheek Sturgeon demanding another Scottish referendum as she would not grant England a second EU referendum if we Remain by Scotland’s hand.

    • Pud
      Posted June 10, 2016 at 8:27 pm | Permalink

      We are currently in the EU and according to your post the Russian Navy is doing as it pleases. How is this an argument for remaining in the EU?

    • bluedog
      Posted June 10, 2016 at 9:49 pm | Permalink

      We Leavers have thought it through.

      We recognise that the EU’s plans for its own Coastguard, Border Protection Force and a credible military with global reach are not just pie-in-the sky but a further and potentially terminal encroachment on British sovereignty. It follows that if Russia is a threat to British sovereignty too, we have a clear choice:

      1) Restore our own sovereignty as an independent nation
      2) Become a vassal state of the EUSSR
      3) Become a vassal state of a reconstituted USSR.

      We demand option 1).

      Hope this helps.

    • Mitchel
      Posted June 11, 2016 at 10:38 am | Permalink

      Excuse me for asking,but are you inhabiting some kind of neo-con fantasyland?

      Putin may consider Brexit to his advantage but he certainly has not”spoken out strongly in favour of leave”.Russian ships frequently pass through the Channel-an international waterway-as they move between the Baltic and Black Sea fleets.The submarine this week was on the surface,towed or at least accompanied by a tug.That fleet last year had been on guard duty in the Black sea for the Sochi Olympics and was returning home.If Russia was going to attack us,it would probably not use those antiquated but beautiful Bear bombers-easy targets.As for this “amphibious assault exercise 7 miles off Devenport(sic)”,I’ve googled those words and nothing comes up.I’m happy to read any credible links you can provide though.

      Don’t forget to check under your bed tonight!

      • Denis Cooper
        Posted June 11, 2016 at 4:12 pm | Permalink

        There was an occasion during the Peninsular War when a Russian fleet was allowed to enter British ports while making a free passage back to the Baltic from Portugal, which became the subject of considerable controversy because some thought it should have been forced to surrender and should have only come in as prizes.

  22. Dennis
    Posted June 10, 2016 at 11:32 am | Permalink

    The rest of JR’s blog has very good points – have they not been available to those of the Leavers paraded on TV and radio who don’t seem to have these and many other good points available to inform the audiences?

    This lacuna is unforgivable – what’s going on? JR, are you informing them and if not why not and if you are are the Leavers ignoring you?

  23. Peter Stroud
    Posted June 10, 2016 at 11:34 am | Permalink

    I think one of the most ridiculous and tiresome aspects of the Remain campaigners is the number of obvious lies they peddle. So many, like the examples given by John Redwood, are so obvious that surely they must offend the folk they are intended to influence. I am surprised that such an astute politician as our PM seems to believe the falsehoods his side is propagating.

  24. CHRISTOPHER HOUSTON
    Posted June 10, 2016 at 12:01 pm | Permalink

    Sky Business News this morning says the fall in High Street sales over the last 12 months is partly due to the uncertainty over Brexit. Yeah, I guess the average lady thinks: “Hmm better not buy a new pair of socks, Herr Juncker may not be my leader in a year’s time. ”
    I blame the schools.

    • Beecee
      Posted June 10, 2016 at 2:51 pm | Permalink

      It is a change from blaming Climate Change

      • CHRISTOPHER HOUSTON
        Posted June 10, 2016 at 4:45 pm | Permalink

        Much rained on schools 🙂

  25. formula57
    Posted June 10, 2016 at 12:12 pm | Permalink

    I take great heart from your words concerning Czechoslovakia where you say “It took less than six months to get from the declared intent for independence to the legal separation of the two…”.

    So with Brexit declared on 24 June we might be shot of Scotland well before the first anniversary to receive yet another big boost to our well-being!

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted June 10, 2016 at 2:49 pm | Permalink

      The government should/could not take any irreversible action before the end of the six week period for lodging legal challenges to the result.

      • Chris S
        Posted June 11, 2016 at 5:46 am | Permalink

        Dennis, Can you think of any reasonable legal challenge that could be lodged against a Brexit vote ?

        I could imagine Vote Leave challenging a narrow vote to Remain over the extension of Internet registration but I would personally prefer to lose with good grace.

        • Denis Cooper
          Posted June 11, 2016 at 4:18 pm | Permalink

          I think that potentially either side could claim there had been various kinds of irregularities, because the integrity of the system has been degraded. Obviously the wider the margin of victory the larger the scale of claimed electoral irregularities would have to be in order to possibly have a material effect on the outcome.

    • stred
      Posted June 10, 2016 at 3:51 pm | Permalink

      Hopefully Cameron and Major will keep warning us that Brexit may lead to Scotland and the lovely Nicola leaving the country. At the time of the Scottish referendum more English, Welsh and NI rish wanted them to leave than the Scots. Thats >50% of 60m and les % of 5m Scots. A win win someone said on QT with a bamboozed Alex Salmon.

      By the way Nicola Sturgeon was trained as a lawyer wasn’t she but she said during the ITV debate that the EU was more democratic than the UK because the unelected Lords made our legislation. This seems very fishy, as though they do try to get their way sometimes, really all they do is comment and revise with permission. Wheras MEPs can’t even propose laws let alone make them, just comment like the Lords.

      If this is right, perhaps some of the SNP MPs in the HoC could explain it to the mouthy little leader.

  26. alan.
    Posted June 10, 2016 at 12:22 pm | Permalink

    Good to remind people John that we have set free Countless Countries in the past, the vast majority who are now really thriving.

    What on earth were our politicians thinking of at the time when we dumped them, in favour of this present undemocratic lot.

    Perhaps we should be using some of this history as an example for leave, to show how Countries can survive on their own, but still co operate with other like minded Nations.

    Little England my arse, the World is awaiting, lets have some vision.

  27. Jumeirah
    Posted June 10, 2016 at 12:35 pm | Permalink

    Whatever the result Conservative MPs must give a vote of “no confidence” in Cameron and remove him and over coming months remove some of those with him. In the event that we win Cameron is not the person to see us EXIT from the EU as essentially he clearly does not believe in it therefore we need someone who does to lead the Team. If Remain wins he is also not the person to carry this forward as he is likely to give away much more than he already has and as has been said before some in the EU will make us pay very heavily for even contemplating leaving (payback for stepping out of line) therefore we need someone strong to hold our position (whatever that position will be) and not backdown. When Cameron is SACKED maybe someone can give him a job – 6th President? IS IT BECAUSE WE DONT WANT TO APPEAR VINDICTIVE Or “it’s not the done thing Old Boy” but why is that you guys (MPs strongly critical of his handling of this as is/are many ordinary people in this Country)) wish him to continue in his post until he has served his term. It should be a short sharp EXIT for him; NEXT and drive the business of the day forward whichever way it goes.

  28. Margaret
    Posted June 10, 2016 at 12:37 pm | Permalink

    Why can they not understand that we can do it on our own , because those in powerful positions have had a hitch up themselves and often at the expense of us poor lowly unintelligent people and they cannot imagine being self sufficient.

  29. Beecee
    Posted June 10, 2016 at 12:56 pm | Permalink

    40 years ago the EU with 8 members accounted for over 30% of the world economic activity. Today, with 28 members, it accounts for just 17% of that activity and declining.

    The German Chancellor says we cannot access the Single Market if we vote Brexit but as it is becoming less important by the year, why are we concerned about it?

    And Oh! Herr Chancellor – goodbye then to the £60bn plus we spend more with you guys than you spend with us.

    We clearly must remember to obey and not act like little Englanders.

    Or else!!!

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted June 10, 2016 at 2:45 pm | Permalink

      Apparently he would prefer trade between the UK and the rest of the EU to be disrupted, potentially triggering a global economic collapse which would take down Germany, and the rest of the other EU countries, especially some of the eurozone countries, at the same time that it took us down. That is how he would demonstrate his strange love for Europe, by unnecessarily risking its destruction out of pique and “pour encourager les autres”.

      Luckily we need not worry too much about this threat, a) because when it comes to it he may change his mind or be over-ruled, and b) because for many years the economic benefits of the EU Single Market have been routinely and greatly exaggerated by pro-EU politicians seeking to build support for our membership and suppress support for withdrawal.

  30. Chris
    Posted June 10, 2016 at 1:06 pm | Permalink

    This from Spectator email this lunchtime:
    Today’s lunchtime news
    1. Britain can’t be in the single market after Brexit, German finance minister says
    In an interview with Der Spiegel Wolfgang Schäuble ruled out a ‘Norway option’ where Britain would keep access to the single market without being an EU member, saying it ‘would require the country to abide by the rules of a club from which it currently wants to withdraw. In is in, out is out’…….

    • CHRISTOPHER HOUSTON
      Posted June 10, 2016 at 2:50 pm | Permalink

      Chris:
      Mr Schäuble is trying to look tough for his domestic audience. His Party is not doing at all well. He is worried sick too about the German economy, actually.
      He warned today along with Bundesbank President Mr Weidmann that low European Central Bank interest rates might herald a “sudden surge in risk premiums”: a massive sell-off in bonds. = The ECB is creating a huge asset bubble without any means or plan to fix it.

      Our media and the Remain Campaign are really not telling us the truth about the EU and the absolute uncertainty it is creating. The EU poses a severe threat to us economically. In my opinion, we not only need to leave the EU asap, but untie and unravel as best we can interconnected trade, even with Germany. The EU ship is sinking and we might get pulled under even when we leave, if we don’t distance ourselves from it.

  31. Shieldsman
    Posted June 10, 2016 at 1:11 pm | Permalink

    Yesterday – The Treasury’s long term forecast for 2030 is absurd.
    Didn’t anyone read Lord Green of Deddington in the Spectator?

    The Treasury says that the cost of the UK leaving the EU would be £4,300 per household – but compared with what? We’re not told. As a cross-bencher, I naturally take very seriously the task of checking and challenging the work of the government so I put down two Parliamentary questions which eventually elicited the response that: ‘HM Treasury did not produce a forecast of how big the economy would be in 15 years’ time….’

    Of much more interest for ordinary people is what impact this would actually have on their wages. The TUC has calculated, on the basis of these same forecasts, that the average wage would rise from £492 a week to £672 if we left the EU, compared with £712 if we remained. Again, this shows that any suggestion that workers would be ‘worse off’ than today if the UK were to leave the EU is entirely misplaced.

    This is what they were trying to conceal. The whole episode shows the government falling far short of the standard of frankness that we expect, referendum or not.

    What’s going on in the EU, is there a news blackout by the BBC?
    Read EurActiv.com 8 June 2016, Brexit or not, Europe’s voters are cooler on EU, survey reveals.
    Whether or not Britons vote this month to quit the European Union, fellow voters across the continent are increasingly sceptical of the benefits of staying in the bloc.

    A Pew Research Center survey published yesterday (7 June) suggests the 23 June Brexit referendum will be close, with 48% of British voters polled unfavorable to Europe and 44% in favor.

    They twist the wording around but it means 48% for LEAVE and 44% for REMAIN

    But opposition has also increased in traditionally more positive countries – with a 17 point drop in EU support to 38% in France, for example, over a single year.
    The vector diagrams are interesting, with the Europeans approval of the EU’s handling of the economy very low, and disapproval very high.

    The people shouted, the trumpets sounded and the walls came tumbling down.

    • alan jutson
      Posted June 10, 2016 at 4:13 pm | Permalink

      Shields man

      “…is there a news Blackout on the BBC…” ?

      Probably, since we have heard nothing from them, even though much has been going on in the EU which should be important to hear.

      Immigrants burning down refugee centres and fighting amongst themselves (reported in the Press today)

      Laws and Policies being delayed until after the referendum

      Huge financial problems for some Countries and Banks.

      Ask yourself, if you were getting £millions from the EU whose side would you be on ?

      Time to look at how the BBC is funded, and by whom methinks.

  32. Vanessa
    Posted June 10, 2016 at 1:13 pm | Permalink

    I read today that some EU “official” has said Britain cannot have the single market if we vote to leave. It is so good to see how pleasant these people are that all they can do is threaten us! They are SO terrified that if we leave there will be others queuing-up to leave once we go. It just shows what calibre these EU government officials are that this is the sort of reaction we get. Not we can negotiate good terms for both sides NO, – leave and we will punish you !!! Well, the rest of the World is much bigger than little Europeans.

  33. Chris
    Posted June 10, 2016 at 1:15 pm | Permalink

    PS to my comment above regarding Spectator lunchtime news about Schauble:
    http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/german-finance-minsiter-schaeuble-warns-against-brexit-a-1096942.html

  34. NickW
    Posted June 10, 2016 at 1:17 pm | Permalink

    In order to have a functional and functioning Government after the referendum it will be necessary to undo the damage caused by Cameron and Osborne’s rude, obnoxious and unprincipled handling of the referendum.

    It was Theresa May who successfully branded the Conservatives the “nasty party” and the behaviour of the remain faction of Government is justifying that name in spades, not least because it is universally understood that only nasty people resort to insults and name calling which is now official Government policy.

    If Cameron’s odious tactics win the battle, the war will in any event be lost.

    Those who vote leave, (which will be approximately 50% of the population) are doing so because they know perfectly well that Westminster has little power left, and what that means is that it will be of very little consequence if Corbyn wins a general election. Leave voters, having been comprehensively insulted and belittled by the deadly duo are not going to vote Conservative in the next election.

    Those Conservative MPs who were selected on the basis of a fervently expressed Euroscepticism and have broken their word by coming out for remain, are going to lose their seats, because come the next election, UKIP will be reminding the electorate of those broken promises.

    We need a functioning Government post referendum and Cameron’s totally irresponsible scorched earth policy is going to make that very hard to achieve.

    Who was it who said “Calm down dear”.?

    • Chris S
      Posted June 11, 2016 at 5:34 am | Permalink

      I think we need to be very careful about generalisations in respect to the Conservative party.

      Post-referendum, labour and that Toynbee woman (you know, that champagne socialist with the villa in Tuscany ), will throw it all back against us like they have done to Mrs May.

      Only a small minority of current politicians have copied CMD and his sidekick and insulted voters, their own party supporters and members.

      If we win, They alone should be isolated and asked politely to fall into line with the wishes of the electorate or quietly find alternative employment.

      Our new leader will need to be ready in case he needs to call an election. A broadly reunited party is therefore essential.

  35. a-tracy
    Posted June 10, 2016 at 2:11 pm | Permalink

    The Germans have indicated they want to make it difficult this afternoon! Once again who put Germany in charge of the other 27 nations.

    So they have no single market access to us, what does this mean for us and for them? Have they spoke to Citroen and Bosch, Mercedes etc to ask if they are agreeable to trade barriers with the UK. Lexus and Chinese manufacturers must be rubbing their hands together. We will be on two years notice won’t we, more than sufficient time to line up other world trade agreements or maybe even, god forbid, make things our selves again.

  36. Denis Cooper
    Posted June 10, 2016 at 2:34 pm | Permalink

    Now that Schaeuble has issued his threat that if we vote the leave the EU we will not be allowed to be part of the EU Single Market it would be a good time to point out that the economic benefits of the Single Market have been greatly exaggerated.

    Just a paltry 2% added to the collective GDP of the EU member states according to the EU Commission, as repeated in UK government official documents, and according to a German study much less than that average, more like 1%, added to the UK economy.

    And against the marginal economic benefits of the EU Single Market there must be set its costs, hard to estimate but certainly well in excess of the benefits.

  37. Bryan Harris
    Posted June 10, 2016 at 2:36 pm | Permalink

    Superb

    LET’S FACE IT – WHEN WE GET THE VOTE TO LEAVE THE EU, THERE WILL BE THOSE THAT WILL TRY AND PUT A BIG COG IN THE WORKS…. WE KNOW THAT – WE EXPECT THE EU TO BE IMMATURE, SPITEFUL AND RESENTFUL – BUT IMVHO WE SHOULD STAND FOR NONE OF THAT.

    Firstly DC has to go.
    Next we have to have a truly eurosceptic PM that will stand no rubbish from the EU elite, and who can be expected to give as good as he gets….
    Third – any MP’s that start creating problems in the Commons should come under pressure from their own constituencies, and get de-selected if necessary.

    THE JOURNEY TO THIS POINT HAS BEEN TOO PAINFUL, AND WE CANNOT RISK ALLOWING THE EU TO TAKE ANY MORE LIBERTIES…..

    We want our fishing grounds back without concessions.
    We want a proper trade agreement with the EU.
    We want a grown up responsible response from the EU.
    We want out of the European court of Justice.
    ….but mostly we want those EU shackles released… Then you will see, with the UK on a different track, not only will we pick up speed – we will really start winning again and inject some real humanity into the problems the wold faces.

    • M Davis
      Posted June 10, 2016 at 7:38 pm | Permalink

      Superb!

    • Lindsay McDougall
      Posted June 10, 2016 at 8:31 pm | Permalink

      Spot on. Below is the rapid Brexit schedule that I have posted several times now.

      A RAPID BREXIT

      Month 1
      Install a new Prime Minister and get Her Majesty to appoint 500 EuroSceptic peers. We should be getting the list ready now. These measures are necessary to prevent malevolent obstruction.

      Month 2
      Repeal unilaterally our Act of Accession to the Lisbon Treaty. At a stroke this releases us from the Clause 50 / 2 year wait restraint.

      Month 3
      Carry on repealing: the part of the original treaty that commits us to ever closer union, the part of the Single European Act that commits us to integration at a later date, and the Maastricht, Amsterdam, Nice and Lisbon Treaties in their entirety. These measures would automatically reduce the competences and joint competences of the EU in UK affairs; simultaneously, the powers of the European Court would be drastically reduced.

      Month 4
      Announce that the following will apply from 1st April 2017 unless the other EU Member States approach the UK to propose something that is mutually better:
      – All contributions from the UK Exchequer to the EU will cease.
      – Freedom of movement across UK borders will cease.
      – The UK will take control of its fishing waters.
      – The UK will take control of its own social, employment and safety law.
      – We will maintain tariff free entry of goods from EU member states, on the assumption that we get a deal at least as good as the EU-Canada deal of 2014. Tariffs on UK goods would be low and be phased out over 7 years.

      Months 5 to 9
      Negotiate with the EU and present enabling legislation to parliament.

    • Anonymous
      Posted June 10, 2016 at 8:35 pm | Permalink

      Bryan – Don’t for get the rioting that will happen in the UK if the result is Leave.

      (There will be no rioting if the result is Remain.)

  38. David
    Posted June 10, 2016 at 6:56 pm | Permalink

    I read an article (don’t recall where, sorry, possibly by investigative journalist Richard North) that the United Nations “presumption of continuity” means that existing trade deals remain in force after a separation such as those cited in your article. Is there such a rule? If so, does it expose as lies the claims by Cameron, Osborne, and others, that trade deals would need to be renegotiated from scratch?

  39. Peter Sullivan
    Posted June 10, 2016 at 8:28 pm | Permalink

    They have such a low opinion of the UK’s abilities for a number of reasons. They do not believe, really, in the nation. They see that idea as divisive and offensive to anyone not British. They also are riddled with colonial guilt and like to wallow in it. They also prefer government from outside these shores, even if undemocratic, if it achieves their aims, including filling the country with foreign workers, whatever the effect. They also believe the EU to be something it is not. They think it a liberal organisation. It is, however, only liberal in branding. It’s core is transnational corporatist. The EU can therefore do a whole host of things liberals would profess to dislike deeply, but condone it as they believe it is essentially liberal. Not perfect, but liberal and reformable, they claim, even though no such reform in their favour has ever taken place, and indeed is going in the opposite direction.

    Essentially they are deeply vain people, neurotically obsessed with anything foreign.

    I know, I used to believe this stuff. I know it inside out.

  40. rose
    Posted June 10, 2016 at 9:30 pm | Permalink

    I am worrying that if we were to win the referendum, and even if we were to get a sound PM and cabinet, they wouldn’t be able to get us out of the EU completely, without the support of the House of Commons. We might end up in the single market, paying for the privilege, and with free movement of people.

    • Chris S
      Posted June 11, 2016 at 4:40 pm | Permalink

      Boris and The vote leave team can close off this avenue easily.

      They just need to repeatedly state in clear terms that they regard a vote to leave the EU as a vote for an end to FOM and being a net contributor to the EU budget.

      MPs and peers would then be behaving unconstitutionally should they subsequently attempt to try and retain either of these fundamental principles of EU membership because they would be acting directly against the express wishes of the majority of people who voted for Brexit.

  41. Androcles
    Posted June 10, 2016 at 10:14 pm | Permalink

    Can anyone explain why an EU that wanted to play hardball with the UK on Brexit would insist on the free movement of labour in exchange for free market access?
    Surely if immigration, as we are told, is vital for our economy and NHS a vindictive EU would want to restrict our access to the labour market.

  42. Chris S
    Posted June 11, 2016 at 2:00 am | Permalink

    I’ve been reading Der Spiegel International for the last four years, particularly to get an insight into political developments and attitudes in Germany related to the EU.

    Our own papers are reporting a speech by Finance Minister, Wolfgang Schäuble in which he gives us a dire warning against voting for Brexit.

    These people simply do not understand the British character. Over the centuries We’ve had plenty of experience of German, Spanish and French dictators telling us what we can and cannot do. In every case it’s worked out badly – for them.

    Despite the very best efforts of Cameron and co to do our country down, there still is enough spirit left amongst our voters to see off threats from minnows like the German Finance Minister.

    Posters to JR’s diary might like to know that It’s possible to post comments on Der Spiegel in response to the Schäuble Article. ( Opening up a kind of second front, as it were )

    Here is what I have just submitted :

    More than forty years ago, the British people thought they were voting to join a trading group of sovereign European countries.

    Unfortunately, looking back at with the luxury of the Internet and email, it is easy to see that our own politicians were comprehensible lying to us. It is obvious that leaders of France and Germany were already intent on Political Union.

    We have spent those forty years fighting a rearguard action against our proud independent country being consumed into a misguided construct designed principally by the French who have always had two objectives :

    1. To constrain the political Power of Germany and her economy.

    and

    2. Create a French- led political, and eventually a military entity to challenge the dominance of the USA on the world stage.

    Although it is obvious to everyone other than President Hollande that both strategies have failed miserably, almost unbelievably Hollande has only this week suggested the EU rather than NATO send a Naval task force to the South China Sea to face down China !

    Only Britain and France possess the ships to even attempt to do this and we certainly won’t be joining a venture that can have no positive outcome.

    Turning to Brexit : Mutti Merkel made a catastrophic misjudgement – She had an opportunity to help Cameron to win the referendum but she aligned herself with the arrogant elite in Brussels who think it unthinkable that any country could vote to leave their wonderful organisation.

    As a result, she humiliated him, telling him he could have almost nothing from his “renegotiation” ensuring that he failed to even ask for what he had set out to achieve in his Blumberg speech.

    Had she given him some reasonable concessions, he would have entered the referendum campaign with a credible offer.

    If the Vote Leave side win, it will because of Brussels one-size-fits-all intransigence. Germany will have to find the greatest proportion of the £10bn net we pay to the EU for the dubious prove ledge of membership.

    I love Europe. I have German and Italian cars, a holiday home in France and spent five wonderful years living in Germany where I have some of my closest friends.

    Yet I will be voting to leave the EU.

    As presently constructed the organisation is doomed to fail. The Euro is so evidently an utter disaster yet everyone in Brussels is in denial – some even think it can survive !

    The economy of France, the pillar at the heart of the EU, is in serious decline and it is obviously ungovernable.
    This time I doubt whether the two traditional parties will be able to convince the electorate to gang up on Marine LePen and keep her out of the Élysée Palace.

    All bets will then be off, whatever Britain decides to do.

  43. bluedog
    Posted June 11, 2016 at 7:39 am | Permalink

    A splendid threat from Herr Schauble, Dr JR, right on time and with commendable Teutonic efficiency. So what does he prove?

    At the outset the good German finance minister shows that, like David Cameron, he is incapable of thinking more than one move ahead. To threaten the United Kingdom on precisely the day that Pew Research Group findings reveal that 61% of the French are disillusioned with the EU is quite remarkably inept. In the event of Brexit, it would seem that French opposition to the EU is likely to be invigorated. What would Germany do in the event of Frexit, threaten France with exclusion from the single market in the interests of consistency?

    Without tariff free access to Britain and France, its two biggest export markets, the German economy collapses. We understand from their immigration policies that the Germans have a sociological death-wish, but extending that trait to their economy seems unwise.

  44. Lindsay McDougall
    Posted June 12, 2016 at 1:11 am | Permalink

    In practice, the biggest obstacle to a fast Brexit is the presence in the cabinet of a pro-European Prime Minister and a similar Chancellor, followed closely by the fact that three quarters of the House of Commons may try to force a Norwegian style deal on us when we want a Canada style deal – i.e. a proper divorce.

    A Conservative Party leadership contest followed by a General Election are needed.

  • 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