Stay in campaign starts with threats and misleading nonsense

Lord Rose lost no time in getting down to threatening us all with dire consequences if we dare to vote for freedom in the EU referendum. He said yesterday we are “stronger, safer and better off inside Europe” rather than “taking a leap into the unknown, risking our prosperity, threatening our safety and diminishing our influence in the world”.

What a depressing and absurd view of the UK. Most countries of the world trade successfully with the EU without being a member. Switzerland and Norway are the most prosperous European countries but are not members. How is leaving the EU any risk to our prosperity? They will want to sell us their goods and will come to a decent trade agreement, as they do with other non EU members. Meanwhile we will be £10 billion better off every year we are out, the money we have to send to the EU and don’t get back.

How is our safety threatened if we leave the EU? Does he have such a low view of our partners that he thinks they will undertake military activities against us? That is absurd. They are peace loving democracies that wish to have peaceful relations with us. We will stay in NATO with most of them as fellow members, with the same mutual obligations and support for each other’s defence as before. The UK leaving the EU will not trigger a western European war.

How also will our influence in the world be diminished? It will be enhanced,  because at last the UK will be free to have her own seat at the World Trade Organisation meetings and at world conferences on matters like climate change, without having to tow the EU line or be represented by an EU figure. Leaving the EU should increase our diplomatic weight and range and enable us to follow UK interests more directly.

Lord Rose needs to tell us more about the wild ride to political union the EU is embarked on. He needs to answer these crucial questions:

How far will political union go, under the 5 Presidents scheme?

How would the UK as a non Euro member avoid being dragged into the political union?

As the Euro will need far bigger transfer payments from rich to poor in the EU, how can the UK stay out of the regional and banking policies which will effect those transfers? Wont the UK be expected to pay her share of the costs of the failings of the Euro?

Why did he and his allies get  the Exchange Rate Mechanism so wrong? Does he now agree that was a European project the UK should not have joined?

Why did so many in the Stay in campaign think the UK should join the Euro ? Does he now agree it was right to stay out?

If it was right to stay out of the Euro why is also right to stay in a growing political union designed with the Euro in mind?


Lord Rose is not defending some friendly status quo that delivers us from insecurity. He wants us to stay in the EU on its wild ride to political union. He so far has refused to tell us the truth about the EU project, and seems to want to run a negative and misleading campaign. His views on encouraging more people from Eastern Europe to come here to work long hours for low wages has already brought hostile criticism from the Independent newspaper of all things, not a known lover of the UK leaving the EU.



  1. Lifelogic
    October 11, 2015

    Exactly but they simply have no rational arguments to put. Other than perhaps:-

    It is a large advantage to big business to have endless absurd regulations that puts smaller businesses at a huge disadvantage to us large ones.

    It is great for large businesses to have lots of cheap labour to suppress UK wage rates.

    Or veiled threats that they will invade us if we leave!

    1. Lifelogic
      October 11, 2015

      There was one good thing in Cameron’s conference speech, he made no mention of his greencrap agenda. Has the government finally realises how bonkers the religion all was? Mind you the government is still wasting large sums of taxpayers money subsidising pointless, fake green absurdities all over the country and in the surrounding seas.

      Judges even trying to outlaw climate change ‘denial’ it seems according to Booker and Delingpole. Do they really want a law against stating or debating the real science, to kill the debate?

      Rather like the Catholic Church and Glalileo being “vehemently suspect of heresy”, forced to recant, and spending the rest of his life under house arrest.

      1. Lifelogic
        October 11, 2015

        Sorry – Galileo

    2. telemachus
      October 13, 2015

      Redwood is as perspicacious and correct as he was when he tried to topple Major
      Does he not understand that the EU is what has guaranteed peace in the post WW2 world
      And what gives us corporate security in the increasingly dangerous world with wars on our flanks
      We must not listen to these little englanders

      Reply The EU is a force for instability, not for security.

  2. Lifelogic
    October 11, 2015

    I see that George Osborne, in the Sunday Telegraph today, tries to make the case for his huge tax increases (made while he still dishonesty claims to be delivering lower taxes).

    He says:- Why is reform necessary? Britain is home to one per cent of the world’s population, generates four per cent of its GDP yet pays out seven per cent of all global welfare spending.

    Clearly it makes no sense to tax people then give it back to the same people as benefits. But removing tax credits to working people is (in effect) just another tax increase and need to be balanced by other tax decreases. Not just wishful thinking that you can increase wages by government decree (which is also, in effect, yet another tax increase and job destroyer).
    Osborne is once again inflicting huge damage on the productive sector to continue to bloat the overpaid and largely inept state sector. So it is just a huge tax grab. Yet more tax borrow and piss down the drain from the lefty dope.

    I also see that his absurd stamp duty rates at the higher end are killing sales of larger houses and so killing tax revenues and the ability of people to move.

    Just stop pissing the money down the drain George and you can tax less and grow a larger tax base.

  3. petermartin2001
    October 11, 2015

    It’s inconceivable that a vote to Stay In isn’t also going to be a vote to join in with the euro. That’s what it very nearly meant in 1976. We escaped by the skin of our teeth some 26 years later. We won’t be so lucky next time!

    It’s a pity we no longer have the services and rhetoric of Tony Benn. Whatever those on this blog thought about his politics they must largely agree he had it absolutely right on the EU. The key to winning the referendum is to win back those on the left who are appalled at the way Greece has been humiliated and her economy smashed by the blind stupidity of the Troika.

    I had hoped we might have had Jeremy Corbyn on board. We still might, but he’s playing hard to get at the moment. I’d suggest that the best figure to pull in votes from the left is Owen Jones. Don’t be too nice to him! That will be counterproductive. Don’t think you won’t need those votes. It could be close so you’ll need every vote you can get.

    Just give him a that bit of discreet support and the platform he’ll need to get his views across to best effect.

    1. petermartin2001
      October 12, 2015

      It seems the Labour Party isn’t far behind. They’ve launched “Labour Leave”. I dare say some on this blog might be thinking they should leave – never to return! But we know what they really do mean!

      The comments below the main article are interesting and may give some insight in Labour thinking. I like the suggestion, made in true working class fashion, that a better title might be “EU -Get Stuffed !”

      1. stred
        October 13, 2015

        If the vote is on a knife edge, the Irish in the UK could swing the vote. How corrupt is that in the devious scheme to keep us in, and suit big business?

        1. petermartin2001
          October 14, 2015

          The Irish and other economic refugees from the eurozone might well be more eurosceptic than you’re assuming.

          If they’re on the electoral roll, there’ll be no point arguing about it, we’ll just need to point out that we don’t want to have the same problems they’ve had and ask for their support.

    2. Richard1
      October 12, 2015

      The stupidity in Greece was 30 years of corruption and socialism. The euro enabled it continued for longer than would have been possible had Greece had to stand on her own feet in the capital markets. Having gone bust it’s no surprise creditors sought primarily to protect themselves (albeit they have failed in that also).

      1. petermartin2001
        October 12, 2015


        I don’t believe anyone is saying corruption isn’t a problem in many countries. It’s a problem everywhere – including the UK. Syriza are aware of those problems and would like to see big improvements. Probably more improvements that the EU powers-that-be are comfortable with.

        But is corruption in Greece enough to explain the mess the economy is in? It’s not just Greece. It’s all EZ countries apart from the big exporters who have problems. If the big exporters like Holland and Germany insist on running a high trade surpluses (8%, 11% of GDP) is it any wonder their EZ trade partners run out of euros and find themselves in debt? Does it then make sense to then grind their economies further into the ground as a punishment?

        This kind of economic sado-masochism is the basis of my objection to the EU. I don’t believe that’s a particularly left-wing objection. Many contributors to this blog have made the same point re the obligation of governments to share out their surpluses within a currency union.

        1. Richard1
          October 13, 2015

          Ok but why do Germany and Holland have trade surpluses within the EU? Because they are competitive versus other countries. So when you say the EU should ‘share out its surpluses’ you are making exactly the point eurosceptics object to: in a currency union the rich and competitive must be taxed to make transfers to the poor and uncompetitive, just as other currency unions such as the UK and the US. I agree this is not a left wing argument it’s a simple statement that that’s the only way a currency union can hope to have political stability – and it’s the strongest argument on the side of the Outs.

  4. Lifelogic
    October 11, 2015

    I see that the IOD is talking complete nonsense over Theresa May’s speech.

    “We are astonished by the irresponsible rhetoric and pandering to anti-immigration sentiment from the Home Secretary. It is yet another example of the Home Secretary turning away the world’s best and brightest, putting internal party politics ahead of the country, and helping our competitor economies instead of our own,” Simon Walker, the group’s director general said.

    Why on earth can we not take the world’s best and brightest without taking the many who will clearly be a large net liability? Rather than the open door to EU migrants and closed to many of the brightest and best from elsewhere? Perhaps the IOD can explain. Of course wages are suppressed by increases supply of labour.

    Any Answers yesterday was very funny with a desperate Anita Anand trying to defend the “BBC think” line against several people who (unlike her) were actually in touch with what was happening at the coal face. Not quite sure how they managed to get through the usual BBC filter system.

    1. stred
      October 13, 2015

      Very often, organisations such as the IOD act completely at variance with member’s views. The RIBA is a good example. My dad organised a vote against them and they ignored it. Just look at their award winners and how disastrous their designs are in financial terms. Many architects are quite sensible, but suffer from the impression given to potential clients.

    1. matthu
      October 11, 2015

      “An explicit statement” that Britain will be kept out of any move towards a European superstate. This will require an exemption for the UK from the EU’s founding principle of “ever closer union”.

      [ the exemption will take the form of an opt-out that we can choose to opt back in to at any stage ]

      •An “explicit statement” that the euro is not the official currency of the EU, making clear that Europe is a “multi-currency” union.

      [ so it is not only Mandelson who wants to disassociate themselves from anything to do with the Euro? They will shortly announce a new currency that can only be transacted online via an EU government agency that will deduct a small fee for the privilege. ]

      •A new “red card” system to bring power back from Brussels to Britain. This would give groups of national parliaments the power to stop unwanted directives being handed down and to scrap existing EU laws.

      [ the red card system will also have provision for yellow cards which result in any directive being automatically suspended for a pre-determined period along the lines of the sin-bin in rugby. Thereafter progress towards implementing the directive will proceed at full pace. We’ve been there before with the various referenda that have either been overturned by requiring a follow-up referendum or side-stepped by implementing the Lisbon Treaty. ]

      1. Denis Cooper
        October 12, 2015

        The important thing to note is that it’s “parliaments”, plural.

  5. Leslie Singleton
    October 11, 2015

    If this is the best the EUmaniacs can put forward I for one am relieved. Never heard of him myself and I cannot say I feel the lack

  6. Antisthenes
    October 11, 2015

    I forgot about that vested interest of Lord Rose and the big business group that he is part of (although smaller business benefit as well) and are keen on and that is the importing of cheap labour. So another conflict of interest as EU law ensure a steady uncontrolled supply. Actually it does benefit the country economically although the general public does not see it that way so not a good selling point for the remain in group. We do need immigrants to come to the UK but not in the free for all way that we are experiencing now.

    The migrant tsunami that is engulfing Europe now and that will continue for a long time to come thanks to the likes of Merkel is going to have serious repercussions. The number of problems that European societies are going face because of those migrants having different standards, ethics, cultures and beliefs than the indigenous people are going to be many and such that we should be fearful. We are already experiencing some of those problems from migrant groups already established here so we cannot deny later that we did not know what to expect. And of course if we stay in the EU those migrants that Germany so generously are embracing will seek and get rights to stay and so be able to roam freely to any EU member state and if they cannot get work in the country they are in and many will not they will move to another one and we know the UK is a very popular destination for such people. The only way to stop that is to leave the EU or at least have EU law changed so that free movement is changed to regulated movement and how that regulation works is up to the receiving nation.

  7. Richard1
    October 11, 2015

    I suppose Lord Rose is doing his best to put forward the advantages as he sees them of the EU. One argument he could use is the EU for all its faults does seem to prevent extreme governments implementing their policies, as we have seen eg with the Marxist Syriza govt in Greece, which has been forced to do much the same as any other government, for all its initial posturing. The same argument could be used in the UK if it looked remotely likely that our own neo-Marxists Messrs Corbyn and McDonnell were to get anywhere near power. EU membership has many unsatisfactory features, but if it prevents far left govts from implementing their programmes it could be said to provide a more stable investment climate. (On the other hand the disenfranchisement of electorates does seem to make the election of such extremists more likely. A tough one).

    1. petermartin2001
      October 11, 2015

      …. as we have seen eg with the Marxist Syriza govt in Greece

      Syriza would never have won the Jan 15 election had not the EU done its best to prove Marx right! That is – capitalism contains inherent contradictions and cannot be relied upon to serve the interests of working people.

      The genuine Marxists of the Greek Communist Party didn’t go along with Syriza’s notion that the EU could be reformed or that the euro as a currency was in any way desirable fro the Greek people.. They want Grexit. Just like most commentors on this blog want Brexit!

      There are those of us on the reformist left who aren’t hardline Marxists and do want a positive co-operation with market capitalism. But it has to be made to work in everyone’s interests. Laissez-faire capitalism doesn’t do that. When there was a different political and economic system in operation just the other side of the wall, the politicians of western Europe had to compete with that. The post war western European system of mixed economies showed what was possible.

      That’s what we want back. I wouldn’t mind being in the EU if that was still on offer but sadly it isn’t.

    2. Denis Cooper
      October 12, 2015

      In other words Rose sees the neutralisation of national democracy as a plus point for the EU. Nothing new there, according to Tebbit speaking at a public meeting Heath said as much to his colleagues as a good reason for joining the EEC.

  8. Leslie Singleton
    October 11, 2015

    It’s as if the rest of the world didn’t exist. It is indeed unarguably the case (as against somebody’s ipse dixit) that the rest of the world trades OK with the EU so are we supposed to believe that we could not because…..why exactly? Because we are too close?? Crazy! Or because we are too small??? 5th largest so even more crazy!

  9. Ex-expat Colin
    October 11, 2015

    If wikipedia is anything to go by Rose isn’t exactly the best choice…is he? The constant rattle of M&S failures, so here’s hoping!

    You might wonder why you would want to trade with a country that likes to fiddle vehicle software. And you also wonder what the likes of Ford must be thinking about their business in Turkey. Houses of cards wobbling almost everywhere?

  10. formula57
    October 11, 2015

    More of a thorn than a rose perhaps?

  11. Douglas Carter
    October 11, 2015

    On a fairly simplistic internet search of ‘Countries of the World’, I find a figure of 257. More than I’d expected and naturally some of them are quite small in terms of qualification for the title.

    However, with an EU of 28 members, if non-membership represents ‘the unknown’ it’s worth pointing out that around 230 countries in the world are bobbing around in that unknown reality. Isolated, at risk, weak, without hope.

    I have no doubt this preposterous illustration is the very best the Europhiles can do – witness, after all, Clegg’s incompetent TV performances against Farage eighteen months ago.

    If, after forty-plus years of membership it’s all they can come up with, I think it’s safe to say it was forty years of wasted money and effort for the UK taxpayer.

  12. alan jutson
    October 11, 2015

    Lord Rose and his comments are just the start of what is to come in the next 12 months or more.

    The out campaign need to argue the case with facts, as indeed you do yourself.

    If the EU is so good, why are the Europhiles trying to water it down with renegotiation ?

  13. Anonymous
    October 11, 2015

    The import of people prepared to work long hours for lower pay perpetuates the inequalities that the Left thrives on.

    It keeps the working class in their place, which some on the Right like to do.

    It is easy to see why the EU appeals.

    Its continuation will lead to the impoverishment of most people in this country and will lead to a decline in their quality of life and the beauty of our landscape. It is not racist to think so – just an obvious conclusion to reach when more and more people are invited to compete for limited resources and opportunities.

    (David Cameron is Tony Blair as Peter Hitchens writes today. Either could have delivered the conference speech.)

  14. Lifelogic
    October 11, 2015

    More good news for the OUT campaign it seems the three disastrous and hugely unpopular prime ministers John Major, Bliar and Brown are all to assist the IN campaign.

    1. matthu
      October 11, 2015

      So the timing of the Chilcot report is everything.

      Expect a further delay.

  15. Mark B
    October 11, 2015

    Good morning.

    Another question we might like to ask Lord Rose; “How can a self confessed ‘free-maketeer’ want to remain in whats is in effect, a Customs Union ?

    And another thing. How can leaving the EU and going it alone be a; “leap into the unknown” when we have only been in the EEC/EC/EU for some 50 years ? Previously, we were busy running our own EMPIRE and since its demise was still trading happily with the rest of the world before we joined the EEC/EC/EU.

    They do indeed talk a load of tosh !

    O/T and if our kind host allows, I would like to pay my condolences to the late Lord Howe. He will be remembered for many things but he was the man who, along with a great lady, came to power at a difficult time and turned this country round. By no means the only one, but an important figure in political history.

  16. MPC
    October 11, 2015

    Unfortunately though the ‘Remain’ campaign is more united at present than the ‘Leave’ campaign. ‘Remain’ also seems to be making a better effort to appeal to younger voters, which Lord Lawson is unlikely to be able to do. Some of us have suggested recruiting young entrepreneurs for the Remain campaign – is there any sign of that happening please Mr Redwood?

  17. Iain Moore
    October 11, 2015

    1-0 to the out campaign.

    Andrew Tice ( I think) came across very well on the Marr Program, he made some very sound points, while the the Innocent boss ( I think , I can’t remember his name), started losing it even on the inoffensive Marr sofa.

  18. Bert Young
    October 11, 2015

    I am concerned at the number of “out” groups that do exist ; in order for a concerted and well thought out campaign to have real impact on the public , these various bodies need to work together ; there is absolutely no sense in splintering the approach . Farage has long been an advocate of “out” and has expressed a willingness to work with other factions ; it has also been reported that he does not wish to be the overall leader . He may not be a good team man , but , he certainly set the right pace up to the last election and , therefore , should be included . I hope the likes of our host and the other influential players will do their best to cement a common approach .

  19. oldtimer
    October 11, 2015

    You make the central point. The status quo is not on offer.

    The choice, in my mind and my words, is between regaining our national sovereignty (the Leave choice) or surrender of our national sovereignty in favour of QMV where the UK becomes a 11% subsidiary of the EU (the Stay choice).

    It would amount to a takeover of the country with all that that implies. And as in all takeovers the outcome is unpredictable, with unknown implications and consequences. Furthermore it is entirely unclear to me how this surrender can be justified given the bungling incompetence that characterises so much of what the EU tries to do (think EZ, think border control, think foreign policy initiatives). Added to which it has yet to produce a set of accounts that any self respecting auditor is willing to endorse. It is astonishing that the British people are to be asked to give away their future to such an enterprise.

  20. agricola
    October 11, 2015

    Absolutely true John, and now we have four clues as to what Cameron is actually asking for in terms of a changed relationship with the EU.
    He wishes to keep us out of the EU super state. Not something that is being asked of us as it would mean adoption of the Euro. A red herring demand.

    Put an end to the encroachment of EU law past ,present, and future, which has supremacy over our own law. If he really wanted this he would revoke the 1972 European Communities Act. He does not, hoping that a pick and mix approach will leave us totally confused as to who rules what.

    Wishes the EU to re-organise itself so that the 19 Euro countries cannot dominate the 9 none euro countries. If he really wants that level of detachment he would leave the EU and join EFTA. All his present demand does is create a grey area where anyone can demand dominance.

    He wants the EU to recognise that the Euro is not the only currency within the EU. This is so banal as to compare with asking the EU to accept that the Sun rises in the East.

    I cannot think of anything polite to describe the above demands as anything but totally inadequate.

    The UK should be demanding an opt out/detachment from all none market aspects of the EU. These include, Agriculture, Fisheries, Employment regulation, Social policy, Foreign affaires, Immigration, EU Citizenship, Taxation in all it’s forms, Green Energy policy, Criminal Justice, European Military integration, City of London regulation, and Trade deals only valid via EU negotiation.

    Cameron’s demands come nowhere near achieving what is necessary if we are to remain or once more become a sovereign state. They do nothing for demanding democracy within the EU. He could return from Brussels with them wrapped in silk and red ribbon, but in reality they would be meaningless. We would have moved no further forward to our desire to be a sovereign state than we are today.

    1. forthurst
      October 11, 2015

      “I cannot think of anything polite to describe the above demands as anything but totally inadequate.”

      Apparently, you are not alone; according to the SE:

      “Tory MEP David Bannerman said: “If correct, this does not look like fundamental reform of the EU.”” You don’t say.

  21. graham1946
    October 11, 2015

    Of course we are not going to get any facts from the ‘IN’ crowd. Didn’t last time, won’t this. Just propaganda, from the papers, news outlets, BBC, government and civil service who all fear for their cushy current arrangements and future aspirations of joining the EU gravy train.

    One immediate advantage for the ‘OUTERS’ that I see already though, is that facts aside, the ‘IN’ lot look like the Tory Party and their rich chums. Not the nation’s favourite people. Lets hope they keep fetching out the multi millionaires all bletaing about how hard things will be for them (and of course the poor as an after thought). It may do more good than trying to get the average factory worker interested in the intricacies of ‘ever closer union’, sovereignty etc. A bit of old fashioned envy may be a good thing for the ‘OUT’ side if we can show that they will be the ones being better off, rather than the current arrangements of the rich getting richer.

  22. A different Simon
    October 11, 2015

    What has Lord Rose ever done for the UK ?

    Pro’s : M&S sell excellent underwear and suits where you can buy extra pairs of trousers .
    M&S are in tune with their customers – who lap up the fake green lifestyle like mini-wind turbines and bio-digesters and don’t care that most stuff arrives by container from China .

    Cons : M&S helped knock the final nails in the coffin of UK garment manufacture creating massive joblessness in places like Shepshed .

    They are just a Walmart for snobs with container loads of mediocre quality items arriving from overseas . Correction a Primark for snobs .

    Why does the UK establishment insist on rewarding leaders of companies which do not support UK manufacturing or hotel chains where the management treat other peoples children in a way they would never treat their own ?

    On reflection Mr Rose’s lack of patriotism and lack of support for British workers outside retailing makes him an excellent choice to lead the IN campaign .

    1. stred
      October 13, 2015

      What happened to their shop in Paris?

    October 11, 2015

    There is a fundament to the Remain Campaign’s assessment. British industry as Lord Rose’s experience provides ample evidence, is incapable of standing alone in today’s world. Look at the mess M&S and Tesco found themselves in when they ventured into America. Look at the almighty losses. The losses too across Europe at various times. The pulling out of Asian markets due to bungled top level strategies.The pitiful saga in the post war years has been utter failure by British big business to ply their trade with even the success of a second-hand market knicker salesman.

    Long existing High Street names vanished. The remaining ones though keeping their names…taken over by foreign companies and individuals. This country cannot even run a football team without an American or Russian bringing his wallet and entrepreneurial expertise.

    Yes I know where Lord Rose is coming from. However he is wrong that the equally enept business circles of Europe should be our business blood brothers and sisters. For that they would need to exhibit historical advancement and have a reasonable plan for successful development in joint projects. They do not.
    So, let us put to one side for a moment the big business giants of Bulgaria, Romania and Hungary whose trade names are on the tips of our tongues. Let us instead concentrate our minds on the Queen of European industry as a possible and worthy trading partner. Merkel’s Germany.
    14% of German GDP is or rather was provided by the business of VW . Sunk!
    20% directly and indirectly of Germany’s employment provided by VW. Sunk!
    Ah but that is just one flagship of Europe’s powerhouse.
    Well here is the second: Deutsche Bank .. a recently announced $6.99 billion write down in its third quarter.
    Of course there is now massive German unemployment …when it has time to get round to registering its new and increasing by the day migrant intake. Absolutely massive.

    Only business people one lettuce leaf short of a picnic would wish to partner a European company. An enterprising UK should take this historic opportunity of the beached whale of Europe and go it alone. But British management at the very top level does need removal one way or another for any chance of success.

  24. Alexis
    October 11, 2015

    ….comes across as a scared Little European.

  25. Tad Davison
    October 11, 2015

    Well said John!

    I sense your anger and frustration, and share your sentiments. We in the UK have been conned every inch of the way for the past fifty years by the likes of Lord Rose. The noble lord hardly does himself any favours by spouting such nonsense, but he’s not on his own, just listen to the Lib Dems (there’s a misnomer if ever there was one!).

    The very name ‘Liberal Democrat’ suggests they have democracy as their cornerstone, yet they would chain us to something in perpetuity, where laws are made by unelected commissioners, and rubberstamped by people with mouths agape, and feeding off the EU tax-payer funded gravy train. The Lib Dems lost all credibility long ago, and then they wonder why they were decimated at the last general election – something I said would happen to the former Lib Dem MP for Cambridge, Julian Huppert.

    Labour are little better, but according to some with whom I correspond, they seek to use the EU to further worker’s rights because they privately know they could never get such legislation passed in the UK because the electorate wouldn’t wear it. That is substantiated by the poor showing at the last GE too. The public weren’t prepared to take a chance with Miliband and Sturgeon running the show, and they voted to keep them out.

    But the most stinging criticism must surely go to the Tories. They’re as guilty as anyone for taking us down the road of full political matriculation with the EU. They are nothing like the party I once supported and pounded the streets for, but they still try to kid us otherwise. I shouldn’t speak ill of the dead, but it was said of the late Lord Howe that he should have been in the Labour party, and I agree, but his is far from an isolated case, the present day Tory party is awash with his kind!

    My idea of a Conservative, is someone who fights for Britain, not meekly and submissively goes along with something that costs us dearly, makes us uncompetitive, and floods the place with people we cannot cope with. I could go on at length about crime too, because the Tory party cannot claim to be the party of law and order any longer. Suffice to say, most people want criminals removed from our streets, even if we put them on some uninhabited island somewhere. And they should not be allowed back into society until they no longer posed a threat or a nuisance to the rest of us. Criminals all have one thing in common, they have a limit beyond which, they will not risk the penalties. Thanks to the woolly left-leaning liberals in the Tory party, such as Gove, their aren’t any meaningful deterrents anymore. And to hell with what the crime survey might say, on the ground in the real world, people are having to suffer whilst police numbers are cut. In a lot of cases, they have given up reporting crime, including burglaries.

    Our parliament needs to be able to make our own laws, not have something foisted upon us by something we never even voted for!

    For me, the only way is OUT! It makes more sense.

    Tad Davison


  26. Tim L
    October 11, 2015


    Please explain to me why upon leaving the EU has the trump cards over trade?

    I understand we buy more of their goods than they buy of ours: so why on earth all this talk of us paying them a membership fee to EFTA so they can sell goods to us.

    Markets wirk on the basis that the customer sets the rules not the seller?

    Whatever they claim the UK can equally charge fees for access to its market too.

    Reply Yes, it is a lie.

  27. William Long
    October 11, 2015

    I agree with all you say here, but it is vital that those like us who think it likely that we will want to leave the EU, remember all the time the emotive arguments and language that Rose is using, are exactly what has kept us in the EU so far. There has never been any dispassionate assessement of benefits or disadvatages on either side that has received much publicity. The difficulty is that logic does not automatically come with exciting words! Patrick Minford and Roger Bootle have done their best but the OUT campaign’s challenge is to tell the truth in a way that hits the headlines and engages voters. Lets hope they achieve this; it should not be impossible.

  28. Nic Smith
    October 11, 2015

    As always, Mr. Redwood, a fine article. I am not a Tory, but support the ideas of the Eurosceptics in your party. Mr Cash, the two Davis’, yourself et al, who see the dangers of remaining in the EU should be applauded for not towing party lines, but for having the objectivity to see that the EU will never retain it’s present status. It either has to become diluted, or move towards closer political union. That is the nature of any ongoing project, otherwise it stagnates. Germany and France will always want closer political union because it serves their purposes. The “remain”/ “in” campaign relies on scaremongering and will not tell the consequences of staying in. Well done for pointing this out.

  29. Chris
    October 11, 2015

    The questions that you are posing for Lord Rose should be directed fairly and squarely at Cameron. He is the one that seems determined to stay in, however little he may gain in terms of trivial concessions. The true eurosceptic Conservative MPs have to bring Cameron to account and in full view of the electorate, albeit belatedly. Individuals like you, Mr Redwood, have tried but Cameron is seen to pursue his europhile agenda regardless, with almost contempt for his fellow Eurosceptic MPs. In this he is apparently aided by the EU itself (see recent examples of EU funding apparently set aside to win over people in the referendum campaign), the BBC and a pliant and uninformed Press. Not good enough. I truly believe we have got to a point where a very significant number of people feel they have had enough.

  30. Maureen Turner
    October 11, 2015

    Can I please ask you the following questions Mr. Redwood.

    “Most countries of the world trade successfully without being a member, ie., Norway and Switzerland.” This is often refuted by the Remain voices saying both these countries have to conform to the same regulations as all EU members and by having to do so gain little or nothing economically. Is this correct?

    I have also heard it mentioned it is likely we would have to give up our seat in the UN as a permanent member with this being transferred to the EU bloc. Is this correct?

    Similarly our standing in NATO would be diminished? France isn’t in NATO and Germany hasn’t a military capacity to speak of so who fills this void.

    Only a week ago Mr. Kenneth Clarke again stated that without our membership of the EU, the UN and NATO we would be of little consequence in the modern world. Systematically, we are being put down as a pretty useless lot but to what end?

    One last question please and this perhaps could answer all of the above. What does, the never discussed, destination of the EU’s “ever closer union” resemble when its citizens finally arrive?

    Reply Most countries i n the world trade with the EU without having to conform with EU regulations and laws – other than needing to meet EU client requirements as we have to meet US. Chinese requirements and rules when we export to them.
    No, the UK will not have to give up its seat on the UN or change it relationship with NATO out of the EU. If we stay in the EU then in due course the EU will probably take the French and Uk seats on the Security Council.

    The picture being painted of the EU is that we are

  31. Peter Davies
    October 11, 2015

    Indeed also Kennethmont Clarke was on TV this morning and gave you a mention. by anyone’s standard if you move powers out of democratic control it’s difficult to argue the case.

    Also I’d like to hear more about EEA/Estate which gives you single market access

  32. Ian wragg
    October 11, 2015

    In today’s Telegraph it highlights the paucity of CMD ‘ S negotiations. Nothing concrete just some vague assurances. No restrictions on movement and no reforms to the CAP or fisheries policy. Just a slow lane to eventual capitulation.
    Does he really think we are so stupid.
    Why isn’t it made plain that Mandleson and co are being paid by the EU and if they want to continue they have to promote the EU.

  33. Monty
    October 11, 2015

    “taking a leap into the unknown, risking our prosperity, threatening our safety and diminishing our influence in the world”.

    Er, “our” influence in the world? We, the public, have no such influence, and our elected leaders have precious little. We have to submit to the dictates of the unelected Commissioners.While our leaders swan around at photo-ops maintaining an illusion of relevance.
    “Our” safety? The enemy we have to fear is within, standing by to carry out the bidding of Isis. And we are being ordered, by Merkel, to accept more.
    “Our” prosperity? While expensive energy makes our products uncompetitive, while heavy industries like smelters are forced into closure by EU directives, and while mass immigration keeps our low paid folk on the minimum wage all their lives with no progression?

    I think his campaign can best be summed up with a handy slogan: “I’m all right Jack…”

  34. Chris
    October 11, 2015

    Am extremely concerned by what I have read about Matthew Elliott’s track record as a true “eurosceptic”, and I wonder whether he should be leading Vote to Leave. Having read the comments he has posted in the past, one wonders if he is truly committed to leaving the EU. I fear not. I can envisage a situation where Cameron brings back some minor concessions, and Elliott deciding to put Vote to Leave behind that position. See the following for details of the views he has expressed on EU membership. I am not convinced.

  35. Martyn G
    October 11, 2015

    When I heard the statement “stronger, safer and better off inside Europe” I immediately thought, where on earth does he get such preposterous ideas?
    Stronger? Absolutely not, the UK would be one lonely voice amongst many, of which most would see the UK as a troublesome companion in their march towards the US of the EU
    Safer? Absolutely not – the free movement of peoples and mass immigration have already placed the UK at greater risk of terrorism, within and without the UK.
    Better off? Absolutely not – the EU is like a sponge when it comes to demanding and soaking up more and more of our money, largely because our economy far outstrips that of the majority of EU members.
    The only good thing about his statements are that they can easily be countered but I fear that most people who read or hear them will be taken in by the yes argument.

  36. Denis Cooper
    October 11, 2015

    In the absence of any real attempt to renegotiate our terms of membership – see today’s Sunday Telegraph – I suppose this kind of twaddle is all that the “Remain” side will be able to bring forward to persuade the electorate. Unfortunately, it may be enough.

  37. Paul Cohen
    October 11, 2015

    Same worn out mantra which Lord Rose has trotted out, intended to frighten the “don’t knows”.

    Would like him to respond to your comments point by point and get a proper debate going.

    1. stred
      October 13, 2015

      If he would do so, then some logical debate may be available to the undecided.

  38. BobE
    October 11, 2015

    Is Lord Rose on some kind of EU benefit, pension or salary , either now or in the future? If so this should be declared.

  39. David Kemball-Cook
    October 11, 2015

    Well said!
    Keep asking the questions and making the points
    All strength to you

    NB You could ask Lord Lawson why he was such a strong supporter of ERM and what has changed between then and now.

  40. PAulDirac
    October 11, 2015

    The “stay in” organization is realistic, the only argument they have is this irrational “jumping into the unknown”.
    This is funny in a way, because it is the younger demographics which support the stay-in side in larger numbers than the older, the young who are supposed to be the brave!

    One thought: If we end up (as a country) voting to stay-in, we will absolutely never have a chance to get out, the UK will end up in the Euro and become part of the German New Empire.

  41. MikeP
    October 11, 2015

    Another ludicrous threat or scare story the IN camp continually serve up – without riposte – is “we’re better off in and able to influence the regulations than have to follow them regardless from outside”. But, from what I’ve read, the UK has been outvoted more than the other countries put together, some influence then ?!?!
    I applaud Cameron’s efforts in the past on the single market, the budget, safe-guarding the City and trying to get a trade deal with the USA, but really how people can say that the 4th or 5th largest economy in the world will lose influence freed from a bunch of nutters is beyond me !

  42. Anne Palmer
    October 11, 2015

    We will NEVER forget, THEY gave their lives for US.

    So many gave their lives for us
    Fighting in two World Wars,
    Yet when “Peace” came at last
    We ask, “What was that war for”?
    Where is that peace we fought for?
    Did we pay to give it away
    To foreigners once more to govern us?
    Did the people ever have a say?

    We were asked once in 1975
    To remain in the then EEC,
    But what is it now in 2015,
    It is nothing like we thought it would be.
    Our Common Law Constitution
    Ignored and deliberately cast aside,
    A new Flag and EU Anthem
    That no Brits can truly abide.

    Yet according to our Constitution,
    We must be free to govern our selves?
    To betray those that gave their lives for us
    Would be like living in a permanent Hell!
    We are forbidden to obey foreigners
    Our Constitution makes that quite clear,
    So WHY are you allowing foreigners
    To Govern us forever more?

  43. Jon
    October 11, 2015

    After the Scottish Referendum I’m a bit dismayed that head of the pro EU campaign has seen that as a template. It was a failure, not because it resulted in Scotland remaining in the UK, it was a failure because the Scottish independence vote moved from 20% to 45%.

    I’m on the leave the EU side, because there is no argument put forward to stay especially considering where the Eurozone needs to go and no two tier EU system set up to cope with that.

    I want a decent debate though and it seems we won’t get that from the pro EU side. It could be that they don’t have one to present.

    I’d bet the Scottish very pro EU stance will reduce and it’s a bit messed up, up there but do the pro EU know that they represent 8.5 odd % of the vote and their stance and tactic is likely to reduce that.

    Since when did the head of internationals represent those that make their permanent home in this country. Yes the small and mid cap business leaders but the international globetrotters? There is a big gaping gap there that in the next two years will be exploited.

    Every time I thing about this I end up favouring exit and that’s not likely to change with the pro EU strategy of negativity borrowed from the Scot Referendum.

  44. Margaret
    October 11, 2015

    We still have influence for now, although with increasing pace we are being ridiculed as our British ness morphs. Our lives were not simply kings , queens and serfs, they were not Alice like figures in a CS Lewis daydream, they were not just rounded vowel sounds and word endings. We had a sense of fairness, knew how to work, how to say sorry, knew that competition was to better ones self and not pull the other down, we grew up with integrity, even the criminals knew they were doing wrong and accepted their sentence, but now it is a game, there isn’t any deep seated morality ; “if ” means nothing.

    We still have a chance to tell them who we are. We are not the sheep who go blindly into crowds inciting anger and frustration ,summoning up trouble . We protect , not aggravate. Justice and fairness is not a myth, if we are still British.

  45. Tim L
    October 12, 2015

    Given that it’s looking like Cameron just wants ‘statements’ from the EU, promises to leave us alone, in other words, there are real threats; we have to trust not just the EU but any future UK government to uphold these promises.

  46. Gina Dean
    October 12, 2015

    Lord Rose is saying it is patriotic to stay in the EU. Please can someone explain how this is, I always thought being a patriot was being loyal and devoted to your country, which it seems not to be the case with the in campaign.

    1. Tim L
      October 12, 2015

      That’s because he sees the EU as his country, that patriotism is acceptable.

  47. mick
    October 12, 2015

    There you go Mr Redwood not one mention from Mr Cameron about immigration in his begging letter to the EU, and this is all about Cameron for now so who`s to say in the next 5yrs if we get a labour goverment every thing is given back to the dreaded EU, so i hope now yourself and other MP`s will be putting the case to leave the EU for sake of this once great country, or are you still waiting for Cameron to come back from Brussles waving a piece of paper in the air

    Reply Try reading what I write!

  48. captain catflap
    October 12, 2015

    The usual nonsense from Redwood.

    Here we go……. “we will be as prosperous as Norway, if we leave the EU” proclaims Mr Redwood !!!!!

    No Mr Redwood, Norway is prosperous because of its oil wealth and a $870bn sovereign wealth fund to boot. I am surprised you are unaware of this.

    Meanwhile we will not save £10 billion. Unsubstantiated number. Based on what Mr Redwood?

    Norway pays the EU several £billion to the EU in membership fees, and is not a member of the EU. There will be no £10billion in savings.

    A gloriously deluded Man.

    Reply Switzerland has no oil wealth but is also a rich country outside the EU.
    The UK has considerable oil and gas wealth.
    The £10 bn is based on the official figures of the money we pay in but do not get back!

    1. petermartin2001
      October 12, 2015

      captain catflap,

      As the EU exports much more stuff to Britain, it should be possible for a determined independent UK Govt to ensure it’s the EU who has to net pay any compliance fees!

      I’m not particularly in favour of charging those kind of fees BTW. They interfere with free trade. But if the EU aren’t reasonable about the fees they levy…….

    2. libertarian
      October 12, 2015

      Oh dear Catflap

      You arent very good at this are you? That old chesnut.

      The oil industry is 20% of Noways GDP. You dont think Norway is the worlds second most prosperous nation due to the fact that unemployment is 2.6% whilst Southern EU is upto 54% amongst other things?

      This from the Norwegian government website

      The total EU contribution between 1994 – 2014 is around 3.27 billion euro. This funding is not distributed through the EU budget but directly to each beneficiary state.

      If you dont like Norway, try Switzerland or Singapore or Hong Kong or Canada or indeed almost any of the 203 nations NOT in the EU

      I think gloriously deluded sums you up well, bit surprised you signed your post with it though

  49. Little Black Censore
    October 12, 2015

    Staying in is also a leap into the unknown; that may be one of the main reasons for leaving.

  50. Andrew Sheldon
    October 12, 2015

    How can our being an independent country be leap into the unknown? We have a many hundreds of years of history during which have made massive contributions to the modern age? Leap into the unknown was the scheming and subtefuge by which Tory and Labour self-appointed elites in governments got us here. They thought only they knew best, they figured the population at large was too stupid to understand “the big issues”.
    We should exit the EU treaties and go forward from there.

  51. nigel
    October 12, 2015

    JR: The Chairman of BT was on the radio this morning and stated that we currently have trade agreements with some 50 countries which would all have to renegotiated. He suggested that as these treaties had been negotiated on the basis of a trading group (the EU) of some 500 million people, it would be difficult for us to negotiate such favourable terms when we renegotiate on behalf of our 65 or so millions. What is your view on this?

    Reply It would be quite easy for the UK to arrange her own trade agreements with these same countries, who would probably agree to us having the same terms as present under our own signature. Anyway we will have the protection from tariffs of the World Trade Organisation rules. Did he explain why the EU has no trade agreement with the USA, China and India? Did he tells us who should pay the £10bn a year for club membership which we do not get back?

  52. Tim Bennett
    October 12, 2015

    An excellent post, taking to task the scare-mongering of those who wish we should remain in the European Union. Questions such as these need to be put relentlessly to the REMAIN campaigners. I have yet to see a single positive argument being presented by them, only an unremitting succession of increasingly implausible attempts to frighten people. I read that today the REMAIN campaign tried to argue that crime would rise if we left the E.U. Would not regaining control of our borders allow us to prevent unwanted Europeans with criminal records from having free entry to this island and thereby have the opposite outcome ?

  53. Jon
    October 12, 2015

    Looking at the video today from the pro Eu it looks like the Globalisation lobby promoting itself which has had it’s critics, ironically enough, from the left.

    What do we loose if we shut out the SME’s for the rest of us?

    Is Stuart Rose going to connect?

    etc ed

  54. Chris S
    October 12, 2015

    What a mess Cameron has got into !

    He’s too scared to put his renegotiation wish list in writing for fear that it will be leaked and Eurosceptics will immediately claim it’s nowhere near enough. (It will be, they will complain and they will be right ).

    Brussels and EU leaders are frustrated because the renegotiations are making no progress because after four months they still have no firm idea as to what the PM is asking for !

    The PM must already know that he cannot make progress on the issues that will really matter in the referendum campaign :

    Inward migration, now completely out of control, courtesy of Frau Merkel
    Freedom of Movement for EU citizens.
    Ever closer union
    and a veto over new legislation.

    How can he possibly satisfy the electorate’s main concern which is net migration into our country ?

    In the last three months we have seen the leader of Germany unilaterally and fundamentally change the entire migration policy of the EU single handedly and then go on to use QMV to force countries to accept a proportion of those arriving against their expressed wishes.

    Each Syrian migrant accepted by Germany is likely to be able to bring in at least six family members. If Frau Merkel decides to grant them EU passports, and that decision rests entirely with Germany, the numbers then coming to the UK will dwarf the 300,000pa we are currently having to deal with.

    Every new development is making the task facing NO campaigners more difficult.
    Interestingly there was no mention of migration at Lord Rose’s campaign launch this morning and he took no media questions.

    The only conclusion we can draw is that they have no answer to this most important issue.

  55. stred
    October 13, 2015

    Please don’t do it yourself. You may make Catholics in the C of E and RCs, who want out, think twice.

Comments are closed.