Brexit can mean a smooth transition to democratic self government

If Brexit wins we wish the transition to be smooth and straightforward. There is no need for any disruption of trade or investment, and no need to change trading rules and product regulations.

It is vitally important that the government does not make an Article 50 request to leave the EU under the current treaties. Government lawyers and Remain campaigners just assume that is what they would do. Vote Leave is equally clear that is exactly what we should not do.

A vote for Brexit is a vote to restore UK democracy and leave the legal controls of the Treaties. The easiest way to implement the popular will if that is the result is to pass a short Act of Parliament. This Act would do two main things. It would remove the support for Treaty based European law afforded by the 1972 European Communities Act. It would confirm all current EU rules and regulations remain in place as good UK law.

The UK government should then open discussions with the EU over what if any changes they wish to see in our bilateral relationship. The UK government can also then take the necessary actions to implement the two main pledges of the Vote Leave campaign. We cancel the payments to the EU, and we establish a points based system of border control which does not distinguish between EU and non EU migrants.

Legislating first but not wishing to change any business arrangements with the EU is the best combination of strength and friendship. Thereafter we have our veto back over any new EU proposal, and can in the years ahead seek improvements or domestic UK changes as we wish. The EU for its part is unlikely to reach agreement amongst the members to impose any tariffs or other additional barriers to our trade unilaterally.

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


  1. Denis Cooper
    Posted June 21, 2016 at 5:28 am | Permalink

    I was interested to see Corbyn saying that if necessary he would defy EU law to protect our industries, and deal with the “political” problems afterwards. I was struck that he chose to couch it in terms of politics rather than law, a view that I actually share: our domestic law as approved by Parliament is sacrosanct, but I would not give so-called “international law” including EU law the same status, let alone a higher status as the ECJ insists must be the case. However it also occurred to me that the Leave campaign has been criticised for putting forward an outline plan which could potentially involve breaches of the EU treaties and laws, and I wonder whether Corbyn is going to get the same kind of stick.

    • Roy Grainger
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 6:04 am | Permalink

      Corbyn’s position seems to be that of the Times in their Saturday leader – they are in favour of staying in a EU that has been radically changed to be more democratic and accountable – ie. in a EU which doesn’t exist and never will. One can only imagine the response Prime Minister Corbyn would get turning up in Brussels and asking for these changes.

    • Hope
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 6:42 am | Permalink

      Not according to Osborne. Yesterday he claims cuts start Friday! What are you going to do with the duo JR?

      • zorro
        Posted June 21, 2016 at 11:16 am | Permalink

        The only two immediate redundancies on Friday should be Cameron and Osborne!!


      • Jagman84
        Posted June 21, 2016 at 11:51 am | Permalink

        The Tory party need to right the wrong that lumbered us with Cameron. Namely, get David Davis in as leader and PM. Many Tory MPs said they preferred him to “Dave” but thought he did not have the charisma of Cameron. Substance over style any day, IMHO.
        Absolutely correct on Article 50, Mr Redwood. I have always said that it was only designed to benefit the EU and was a trap for leaving Nations.

      • Mitchel
        Posted June 21, 2016 at 1:46 pm | Permalink

        Today’s government borrowing figures show Osborne is way off target for deficit reduction.After two months ,cumulative borrowing is up £o.2 bn against a target of a c£20bn reduction for the full fiscal year.If there is an emergency budget later this year,it may not have anything to do with Brexit.

    • bluedog
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 12:04 pm | Permalink

      Corbyn is our secret weapon. He’s turned and he is hedging Labour’s position in all directions. The rank and file in the north are not going to vote Remain, they’re Leavers and Corbyn knows that. He’s given them a way out. It’s only the educated ‘progressives’ of the South-East and elsewhere that will vote Remain. All the signs are that Labour won’t deliver for Cameron.

      To undermine the SNP in Scotland, Leave needs to repeat the fisheries message morning, noon and night.

  2. DaveM
    Posted June 21, 2016 at 5:32 am | Permalink

    In my job we try to plan for every eventuality. I have to say it beggars belief that a Cabinet could be so irresponsible that it hasn’t decided even the most basic contingency plan.

    • matthu
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 5:49 am | Permalink

      And that is why they should be removed in the event of a Brexit vote.

      • Lifelogic
        Posted June 21, 2016 at 10:56 am | Permalink

        The government’s behavour is just appalling. Threats of tax grab budgets from IHT ratter, pension robber, tax ’till the pips squeak Osborne, Cameron saying he will invoke article 50 the next day, claiming there is “a reformed EU”, claiming Schengen gives us “control of our borders”, claiming open door migration help the economy, claiming more pay more in than they cost (so do most do not), mercilessly milking the tragic death of Jo Cox, telling all the arms of government and big business to lie to the public, issuing a leaflet for one side only, extending registration dates …..

        For goodness say get out now for the sake of democracy and to remove Osborne and Cameron as a bonus. Democracy or Serfdom that is the simple choice.

        Remainers should vote leave too a better deal will follow as night follow day.

        • Lifelogic
          Posted June 21, 2016 at 10:58 am | Permalink

          What on earth did the UK do to deserve the dire governments Heath, Wilson, Major, Bliar, Brown and Cameron! Even Mrs Thatcher’s government got so much wrong on the EU.

          • bluedog
            Posted June 21, 2016 at 12:16 pm | Permalink

            With the demise of empire the EU became the project for a whole generation, exemplified by Ken Clarke. Too young to fight in the war and forever in the shadow of that generation, a united Europe seemed a worthy goal to pursue. But they screwed up by following Monnet’s proscription for ever closer union without democratic consent. The EU may have worked without the reunion of Germany, but since the Germans became the dominant demos, the EU has been unbalanced and consequently doomed.

            If Brexit fails we need MP’s who have the capacity to understand the structural weaknesses in the EU to become ambassadors of risk management. It is quite clear that many MP’s are way out of their depth and need to be lead to a greater understanding of the dangers of the EU by an informal cross-party group.

  3. Denis Cooper
    Posted June 21, 2016 at 5:43 am | Permalink

    According to the FT:

    “Untangling Britain from Europe would cause constitutional ‘havoc’”

    Actually untangling “Britain” from “Europe” would cause geological ‘havoc’, but set that aside; what the article unwittingly reminds us is that what was originally described as a free trade area which would help our exporters and in which there would very limited need for transnational or supranational laws has gradually morphed into a union whose laws have such a wide scope and penetrate so far into our national law, including our constitutional law, that it will be a long and difficult task to untangle it.

    But then searching for a particular 1975 quote on this I came across an article from April making a similar point:

    “After decades of denying that Brussels creates very much law, the ‘in’ campaign has changed its tune.”

    “‘English common law is not affected. For a few commercial and industrial purposes there is need for community law.'”

    Thus an official Yes campaign flier reassures referendum voters that Brussels poses no threat to the UK’s legal cultures. Of course this was in June 1975. Four decades on, no one on either side in the Brexit debate can dispute that the acquis communautaire now spans a great deal more than ‘a few commercial and industrial purposes’.

    What’s interesting is the side of the debate making the noise about it.”

    “Last week, though, I heard the scale of the EU’s contribution to English and Welsh law advanced as an argument for staying in. A meeting of the All Party Parliamentary Group on constitutional affairs, supported by the Law Society and Bar Council, seemed to show a consensus that the extent of legal entanglement would make any divorce impracticable, at least within the two years envisaged by the Lisbon Treaty.”

    • DaveM
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 7:25 am | Permalink

      Ref the phrase:

      “Untangling Britain from Europe would cause constitutional ‘havoc’”

      Last night England played Slovakia, a country which, until about 25 years ago, was part of a country called Czechoslovakia, which in turn was a part of the USSR. Most of the kids watching that match don’t even know that.

      It really can’t be that difficult. It just means the politicians and lawyers might actually have to do some real work rather than swanning around insulting each other and making money out of small businesses who may have contravened some pathetic H&S law.

      Incidentally, “havoc” was a Roman code word meaning “kill everyone and everything”. I don’t think it will be as bad as all that.

      • Denis Cooper
        Posted June 21, 2016 at 11:32 am | Permalink

        Well, Czechoslovakia was not part of the USSR, just the Warsaw Pact.

      • Mark B
        Posted June 21, 2016 at 11:46 am | Permalink

        Czechoslovakia was never part of the USSR. It was however, part of the Warsaw Pact.

      • Colin
        Posted June 21, 2016 at 12:37 pm | Permalink

        Incidentally, “havoc” was a Roman code word meaning “kill everyone and everything”.

        Dear me. “Havoc” is Old English for “hawk”. In hawking, once your dogs have found a bird and pointed at it, you put up the hawk, and when it’s in position you let the dogs off their slip leads to flush the bird, and call the hawk to catch it. Hence Shakespeare’s “Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war.”

        • DaveM
          Posted June 21, 2016 at 3:24 pm | Permalink

          I beg to differ but I’m not going to have a protracted argument!!

          • libertarian
            Posted June 21, 2016 at 9:59 pm | Permalink

            Colin /Dave M

            Actually you are both right !!!

            Hafoc is the West Saxon word for hawk, the etymology root of the word is “to seize”. Havoc is a military term Late Middle English: from Anglo-Norman French havok The word was originally used in the phrase cry havoc (Old French crier havot) ‘to give an army the order havoc’, which was the signal for plundering

  4. Antisthenes
    Posted June 21, 2016 at 5:45 am | Permalink

    The UK will not leave the EU even in the unlikely event that on Thursday we vote that we should. If we vote to leave the EU will offer a few more meaningless concessions and ask us to vote again. As the majority of MPs are against leaving the offer will be accepted and we will hold another referendum.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 6:23 am | Permalink

      Well, then, let’s vote Leave to get those extra concessions …

      • ian wragg
        Posted June 21, 2016 at 2:08 pm | Permalink

        Then we can vote again and dismiss them even with a bigger majority.

    • DaveM
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 7:25 am | Permalink

      I don’t think they’d dare go down that route.

    • Anonymous
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 8:31 am | Permalink

      Antisthenes – The polls show neck and neck. Two questions on that then:

      – why are two thirds of MPs pro EU ?

      – why does every BBC panel show seem to have Brexit representatives outnumbered 3:1 (including the presenter) ?

      • Lifelogic
        Posted June 21, 2016 at 11:01 am | Permalink

        The BBC bias is appalling and evident in nearly every single programme – not just political ones. Try woman’s hour or More or Less for example.

        Libdem/socialist/greencrap/EUphile, second rate, irrational, art graduates to a man or women.

        • Peter Stroud
          Posted June 21, 2016 at 12:00 pm | Permalink

          Absolutely correct about the BBC. Did you hear the disgraceful interview with Gove on the Today programme this morning? He was continuously interrupted, but was too well mannered to ‘floor’ the interviewer. I predict that the Today programme will be banging the remain drum even more loudly tomorrow.

        • Robert Christopher
          Posted June 21, 2016 at 12:03 pm | Permalink

          How about this for EU propaganda on the BBC? And it was on last Thursday evening when there was supposed to be a ‘pause’ in the referendum campaign:

          BBCs R4’s The World Tonight: China’s views on Brexit

    • MartinW
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 6:43 pm | Permalink

      I think we are of sterner stuff. Hopefully, ‘Leave’ will have learned from the failures of their dismal campaign and re-group under a modified agenda with increased vigour – that is, assuming Remain just win. Lesson 1: Never rely on Cummins again for direction.

  5. eeyore
    Posted June 21, 2016 at 5:49 am | Permalink

    All this makes good sense, Mr Redwood. What you don’t say is how you will ensure HMG – which we now know will be led by the same people – does not commit itself to the damaging route you fear. Mr Cameron has already indicated he will immediately invoke Article 50. We know he’s slippery as a greased eel but even so … .

    Without revealing details of your strategy, which would obviously be counterproductive, can you reassure us you have ways of pinning him down?

    • Mark B
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 6:09 am | Permalink

      Nonsense !

      We should not invoke Article 50 straight away. What we should do is make sure we have a plan like FLEXCIT. The we go for Article 50.

      Get all the pieces in place first then leave.

    • zorro
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 8:09 am | Permalink

      He will be a spanner in the works to kybosh how we leave. That problem must be dealt with.


      • Lifelogic
        Posted June 21, 2016 at 11:04 am | Permalink

        We will not get out without a second referendum (with a better offer first being rejected – how could it not be better). This even if we do get a good Brexit majority.

        Too many EUphiles in the establishment, career politicians and snouts in the trough.

  6. Denis Cooper
    Posted June 21, 2016 at 5:52 am | Permalink

    It’s always possible to pass an Act parts of which will only come into effect at some point in the future, for example it could be said in the Act that the commencement order for those delayed parts would be made once a new treaty has been signed.

  7. Newmania
    Posted June 21, 2016 at 5:52 am | Permalink

    Lost me here .

    A toaster arrives in Germany .
    Is it EU?
    Tarrif applies then .
    Oh no that nice Mr Redwood said we would all try to be reasonable and this has a Union Jack On it
    Made in China then
    No really I think its British
    Ok then stop the warehouse , look would all you lot try to fish out the UK stuff because that is sort still in the EU and some bloke in the UK said its ok
    We aren’t applying the law then
    No you see this bloke on the internet said ……

    Hey I got this really cheap Motor Insurance
    Coo , who wrote it ,
    Um..lets see its Germany Big Co.
    Oh is that off shore then ,… you know that means you don`t get any protection should it fail
    No honestly its ok ,, you see this nice fello Mr Redwood said on his blog it would be ok
    Yeah but that’s not the law


    Does anyone know what he is on about ? I really haven`t the slightest idea

    Reply Current rules for products and trade remain in place until we agree changes!

    • Mark B
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 6:11 am | Permalink

      Reply to reply

      I am not voting for changes, I am voting OUT !!!

      I am I wrong or is this so called referendum about being IN or OUT of the EU ? It is not about fiddling around some trade rule edges.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 6:52 am | Permalink

      What you describe is the “legal chaos” which must and will be avoided.

    • Newmania
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 7:45 am | Permalink

      Current law refers to EU members. It does not refer to Nations who used to be EU members and there is no law, in this context that applies to the UK particularly. For your idea to work there would have to be some sort of special interim bilateral agreement .
      Take the Freedom of services Act, the loss of which is terrifying everyone working in the City. Find me a reference to the UK in it, or indeed a reference to former members of the EU.
      There is no such thing. Out means no EU wide compliance or capitalisation day one .
      That is going to kill off the City and, as you may not have noticed, it is also going to have a disastrous effect on our domestic retail Insurance market ( as well as the London market).Domestic Premiums came down about 25 % when we came under the ACT
      They will go up about the same amount.
      People have not begun to grasp the scale of the catastrophe we could be engulfed by and if there is one word for everything this astonishing idea is not it is the world “ Conservative”

      Well tats how I see it anyway and I ceratily have seen nothing convincing to verify this cake and eat it theory

      Reply We were told if we stayed out of the Euro we would suffer grave damage to the City. Why should we believe the same old nonsense?

    • Newmania
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 8:06 am | Permalink

      No change is required.Current law refers to EU members. It does not refer to Nations who used to be EU members and there is no law, in this context that applies to the UK particularly. For your idea to work there would have to be some sort of special interim bilateral agreement . Have you got such a thing ?

      Take the Freedom of services Act, the loss of which is terrifying everyone working in the City. Find me a reference to the UK in it, or indeed a reference to former members of the EU.
      There is no such thing. Out means no EU wide compliance or capitalisation day one .
      That is going to kill off the City and, as you may not have noticed, it is also going to have a disastrous effect on our domestic retail Insurance market ( as well as the London market).Domestic Premiums came down about 25 % when we came under the ACT
      They will go up about the same amount.
      Do you recall it took only weeks of cancelled order for the Construction industry to collapse entirely . They don`t have any money you know, it all exists of momentum and confidence.

      I could go on. People have not begun to grasp the scale of the catastrophe we could be engulfed by and if there is one word for everything this astonishing idea is not it is the world “ Conservative”

      • Denis Cooper
        Posted June 21, 2016 at 4:47 pm | Permalink

        You seem to think that after we’ve voted to leave the EU on Thursday we’ll be out of the EU on Friday. Not so; as that chap whose name I can’t remember – the one who was supposed to be leading the official Remain campaign – said, nothing much will change for several years. I think even the official Leave campaign outline plan has us still in the EU until 2020. There will never be any lacuna or haitus, any period of legal chaos when an existing arrangement has terminated without a new arrangement taking over in a smooth, in fact a seamless, transition. People are not idiots, you know; they are well aware that in each case the new rules will have to be negotiated and agreed so they are ready to come into force at exactly the same instant as the old rules finish.

      • Anonymous
        Posted June 21, 2016 at 4:53 pm | Permalink

        Newmania @8.06 – We don’t doubt there will be severe consequences, and this is why the vote is split 50/50 at the moment and most of us are anxious.

        Of every single person I know who is voting Remain they are doing so reluctantly. There is not one EU enthusiast among them. (None of them know a thing about the EU or its institutions – but this is not my point.)

        Some things are greater than the economy and sovereignty is one of them.

        You can rebuild an economy but sovereignty has to be fought for with blood.

        You first appeared here a few days ago and called us racists. At 5.52 you ranted incoherently in a badly written post about toasters and insurance.

        Throughout the campaign the rudeness has been from Remainers towards Brexiters. I can prove this with umpteen video and picture links. And your recent comments.

        Reply I do not accept there will be severe consequences. The EU did not punish all those countries that voted down all or part of the EU scheme.

        • Anonymous
          Posted June 22, 2016 at 12:32 am | Permalink

          Reply to reply – I agree. But most people don’t and beyond this Project Fear has failed with around 50% of them. Why ?

          Because the worst is already being done to them through mass immigration under the aegis of the EU.

          I would expect 70% of voters would stick two fingers up to the EU were it not for fear of leaving. There is no love of the EU in this country.

    • zorro
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 8:12 am | Permalink

      Newmania, you are not interested in seeing how this will work are you? You are creating paper Tigers at all points. Existing rules apply until we agree changes!


    • Anonymous
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 8:37 am | Permalink

      Newmania – This week we’ve had much said about the tone of the EU debate.

      The thing is – the only poor tone I’ve been hearing is from the Remain side. Including your recent postings.

      It’s a turn off. As soon as you take that approach I stop reading what you have to say.

      In any case, your sarkily framed comment was put down with a simple one-liner from our host.

  8. Mark B
    Posted June 21, 2016 at 6:02 am | Permalink

    Good morning.

    Well, well, well. As I suspected, a Europlastic. You do not want to leave the EU, you just want to reset things back to a point in time. Well sunshine let me tell you something, it ain’t going to happen. The EU says it itself; “You are either in, or OUT !”

    If you want to leave the EU, as I do, then you are going to have to invoke Article 50 and negotiate a new settlement.

    No Eurosceptic are you !

    No wonder you don’t like putting up my posts.

    Reply What a silly post. I have spent years seeking this referendum so we can make our own decisions. If we vote for Out we vote to renounce the EU Treaty, so we have no need to follow its clauses thereafter.

    • Mark B
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 11:53 am | Permalink

      Reply to reply

      And what a silly notion to think you can just walk out after more than 40 years of marriage and carry on as if nothing ever happened.

      We signed treaties with the EU in good faith. Part of one of those treaties, Lisbon, deals with a member country (they call it state) leaving. It is called Article 50. If we declare UDI they will be within their rights to punish us.

      What if Scotland just declared UDI ? What would the rest of the UK’s response be do you think ?

      Not so silly a post when you think about it and considering you have wanted to leave the EU, I am surprised to think that all you want is a few rule changes.

      Reply Once a divorce is granted the marriage is over – but it is not a good analogy for renouncing a Treaty and having a new relationship based on the equal independence of both sides. I want a new borders policy, I want to end all our financial contributions, and to change our taxes and budgets as we see fit. I do not wish to stop our trade or change the various requirements on EU goods and services, any more than the rest of the EU will want to faced with the reality of our leaving.

      • Mark B
        Posted June 21, 2016 at 12:14 pm | Permalink

        And I want us to honor our commitments and not allowed them the opportunity to punish us.

        The EU is in effect our government. They have signed trade and other treaties on our behalf. If we leave in the manner you propose, we would no longer be covered by those treaties and agreements. We could therefore, end up in a far worse situation than imagined. We would be badly damaged and we may have to invoke Section 5 of Article 50 and ask for membership back. That would allow the UK to be readmitted (Cameron clearly either does not know this or is lying again) but, and this is a big but, we would lose our opt-out of the EURO. ie we would have to join.

        We need a plan first. Once we have a plan, we can then invoke Article 50 and amend or repeal the ECA. Two years of negotiation and then exit too the EEA and EFTA. After that we go for FULL independence once we have sorted ourselves out.

        But we need a plan and neither the Remain or the Leave seem to have one. It’s just; “Oh, lets ‘ask’ for a few changes.”

        Gandhi did not ask for; ” a few changes” when he wanted India to be independent. Nelson Mandela never asked for; “a few changes” when they wanted to be treated as equals on this earth. Why should I accept; “a few changes” when referendum is clearly offering me BREXIT ?

        Reply When we legislate to leave, all EU Treaties with 3rd parties novate to be our Treaties as well.

        • Denis Cooper
          Posted June 21, 2016 at 2:23 pm | Permalink

          My thought is that we will need to explain ourselves to the world, as the American revolutionaries realised:

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

          It’s that very necessary “decent respect to the opinions of mankind” which means we should try the agreed exit route first and only resort to unilateral abrogation if that fails us.

          Our diplomats will have to talk with the diplomats of nearly 170 countries around the world, to explain our actions and try to get them on our side.

  9. NickW
    Posted June 21, 2016 at 6:29 am | Permalink

    It does unfortunately happen that when a relationship is unilaterally ended that the other party indulges in irrational and self destructive behaviour out of spite.

    The Eurogroup might decide for example that it wished to make life as difficult as possible for us “pour encourager les autres”. Would EU tariffs on UK goods be passed by QMV, or does anyone have a veto?

    What the UK will need is a small group which wargames the different scenarios which might be used against us; it is a common tactical mistake to only think one move ahead; we need to be prepared and ready for a variety of response, both reasonable and unreasonable.

    The EU needs to be in no doubt that any tariffs put on us will be instantly reciprocated, no ifs, and no buts, which means that any chinless wonders need to be left out of the negotiating process.

    There is a role for the ex military in the negotiations, they can be trusted not to roll over and give in; the Foreign Office is on the other side, and has been for years. The other party in our negotiations needs to be in the main, National Governments, and not the EU itself.

  10. Lifelogic
    Posted June 21, 2016 at 7:03 am | Permalink

    Indeed nothing to fear at all. That is the way to go. But with the milking of the Jo Cox tragedy and her sanctification for remain will the voters actually give us the right result or will they vote for EU serfdom?

    Kinock the younger seems even worse than his father. Of course the UK and other will leave anyway eventually, but now is the time. The sooner the better.

    • Anonymous
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 3:29 pm | Permalink

      It seems that the Jo Cox tragedy had nothing to do with decades of the will of the majority being ignored by the pro EU elite.

  11. Denis Cooper
    Posted June 21, 2016 at 7:08 am | Permalink

    Suppose you had a friend who had become very unhappy in his present job, in fact it was beginning to make him ill, but he wasn’t sure whether to take up the offer of another job because it would entail a 2% reduction from his present salary and it might take a year before that rose back to his present level. What advice would you give him?

    Would you say:

    Even though it’s making you miserable and you could even have a breakdown you should Remain in your present job rather than accept that 2% salary cut. You should think that even if you were able to get back up to your present salary level within a year you could still be permanently poorer for the rest of your life, is that what you want?

    Or would you say:

    I think you should Leave and just accept the immediate 2% pay cut as the price for making the change, after all your present employer seems to be going down hill fast and you could well find that the long term prospects are much better in the new job.


    • zorro
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 4:10 pm | Permalink

      Not at all difficult!


      • Denis Cooper
        Posted June 22, 2016 at 6:58 am | Permalink

        I know, but some seem to think it would be an agonising choice.

  12. Lifelogic
    Posted June 21, 2016 at 7:48 am | Permalink

    I reed that Steve Hilton, David Cameron’s former adviser, said last night that that the Prime Minister was told by civil servants that his immigration target was “impossible” four years ago, but continued to make the promise. Indeed the government propagander leaflet still claims/lies that we can control our borders within the EU.

    Such is the man as we know. He surely knew it to be a lie when he first uttered it. Just as when he said he was “at heart a low tax Conservative” cast iron or not if no but. He is neither, he is a spin merchant, liar and a professional politician. Surely the voters can see this?

    We must vote for independence. June 23 needs to be an independence and restoration of UK democracy holiday. Not the end of the U.K. and endless EU serfdom day. Are the British really so lacking In confidence and backbone. Have the BBC and the tentacles of government cowed and conned them yet again?

    If nothing else we need to be rid of out dire, tax ’til the pips squeak, wooden, socialist, wasteful and economic illiterate chancellor.

    • Mark B
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 11:56 am | Permalink

      Many people I know are voting to leave. These people are not British born or are from the EU, they are from our former colonies. They, from their own past experiences no doubt, know a ‘wrongen’ when they see one.

      • Roy Grainger
        Posted June 21, 2016 at 3:24 pm | Permalink

        Several EU nationals I know living here support Brexit, which surprises me a bit.

        • rose
          Posted June 21, 2016 at 5:00 pm | Permalink

          It doesn’t surprise me. The ones I know want us to lead the way but are worried by the EU’s track record on crushing referendums. And the French ones are terrified of having their army and navy taken over.

        • libertarian
          Posted June 21, 2016 at 10:10 pm | Permalink

          Not just living here

          A poll in the Netherlands 2 weeks ago had 88% support for Brexit, and a huge demand for Nexit. Ordinary people right across Europe are increasingly anti EU.

  13. Bert Young
    Posted June 21, 2016 at 7:55 am | Permalink

    Your proposals John to ensure the most effective way to implement Brexit – if that is the outcome , are sensible and very straightforward . One responder has already indicated the danger of Cameron invoking clause 50 and I am worried about that . He has shown many times that he cannot be trusted – witness the latest disclosure from Steve Hilton , this being the case , what steps do you propose to counter such a move ?.

    The campaign is now almost over with the opinion polls showing a 50/50 split ; if this was the result , what would then happen ?; would we be committed to another vote ?. Something needs to be pulled from the bag to convince the “undecided”.

    • bluedog
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 11:48 am | Permalink

      A concerted campaign to sack Cameron has been the highest possible priority ever since he returned empty-handed from his failed negotiations.

      • Mark B
        Posted June 21, 2016 at 11:56 am | Permalink

        And not get us out of the EU. What a sham !

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 2:32 pm | Permalink

      Legal challenges to the result is what could happen, if it is close.

      Here it is claimed that some ballot boxes went missing and the contents were not counted, there it is suggested that there were irregularities with the postal votes, and elsewhere it seems that the sub-totals were not added correctly … plus there could be cases which lawyers agree to pursue knowing that they are hopeless, such as a plea that resident Irish citizens should not have been allowed to vote.

  14. Elsey
    Posted June 21, 2016 at 8:43 am | Permalink

    Assuming a Leave majority we would then face the hurdle of it actually being put into force. Given the record of the elites duplicity and the preponderance of pro EU MPs it is entirely possible that the vote would be ignored. That would lay the delusion of democracy bare for all to see.
    If, by some miracle, the UK did actually start the process of regaining it’s freedom why would we want to keep all existing EU laws in place? Most are pointless, expensive and positively harmful. Get rid of them and liberate our economy.
    Yes we should cancel payments to the EU and yes reinstate proper border controls including a lot more patrol boats in the English Channel. Bring back all our armed forces engaged in provocative and illegal actions across the planet and defend our shores as they are meant to do.
    Whilst all this is happening there should be a purge of all the pro EU backstabbers that have caused us to be in this mess. Cameron and co. should resign for a start. When a revolution happens- and this would be a revolution, you can’t have the old guard left in charge of anything or you will have achieved nothing.

    • Mitchel
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 2:09 pm | Permalink

      Indeed.As the Jacobin leader Louis Antoine de Saint-Juste said (just before going to the guillotine)- “Those who would do revolutions by halves do but dig their own graves”.

  15. fedupsoutherner
    Posted June 21, 2016 at 8:49 am | Permalink

    Cameron simply cannot be allowed to move this transition forward. He will do everything to make things really bad and therefore get another referendum so the public vote Remain. I fear we will never be free of the EU. This is our one and only chance to free ourselves and we must not allow it to be ruined by Cameron and Osborne who will do anything to ensure they get the result they want.

  16. Tad Davison
    Posted June 21, 2016 at 9:15 am | Permalink

    Off topic, but it is a special lady’s birthday today.

    With John’s permission, could we all wish Kate Hoey a happy 70th birthday. She e-mailed me this morning after attending a successful Labour leave rally in Gateshead last night that drew 1100 supporters!

    Kate is a real fighter for what she knows to be true and deserves our thanks.


    • Lifelogic
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 11:07 am | Permalink


    • Denis Cooper
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 11:35 am | Permalink

      Lovely lady. I think she’s good at cricket, as well.

    • Mark B
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 11:57 am | Permalink


    • stred
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 12:07 pm | Permalink

      It would be a very good thing if Kate Hoey and Gisela Stuart formed an alternative party, which would attract many more Labour supporters than the loony left specimens put in charge by the green/anarchist/hard left new members. As a lifelong conservative I find little to disagree with anything these two ladies say. The box has Nicholas Soames on at the moment saying that Cameron is some sort of great leader who should generously invite Boris into the cabinet after the result and all will be well. Let me assure the Tory remainiacs that after their performance during this referendum the 60% of ex- conservative voters who may have voted for them last time will not be fooled again. Cameron, Osborne , May and the other useless twisters will have to go or otherwise a new independt conservative party, possibly including some ex- Labour MPs will have to be formed.

      • fedupsoutherner
        Posted June 21, 2016 at 4:21 pm | Permalink

        Stred. Absolutely agree with you here. I never vote labour but given the dire state of the conservative party I might just vote Labour in future if these two ladies were in charge.

    • Chris S
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 3:08 pm | Permalink

      For many years there have been only three Labour politicians who I would vote for if I lived in their constituencies. They are :

      Frank Field, Kate Hoey and Gisela Stuart.

      This short list obviously predates the referendum campaign.

      • Edward2
        Posted June 21, 2016 at 6:48 pm | Permalink

        Totally agree.

    • Roy Grainger
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 3:27 pm | Permalink

      Pity there was no Labour big beast supporting Leave, someone like Tony Benn would have swayed a lot of voters.

      Reply John Mann, Gisela Stuart, Kate Hoey are important figures. I think the Labour Leader has also been as helpful as he dare to Brexit

      • Timaction
        Posted June 21, 2016 at 4:59 pm | Permalink

        I agree. Mr Corbyns real views are well known . When are the Tory Party removing Shameron and incompetent Osbrown?

  17. Charles Cara
    Posted June 21, 2016 at 9:24 am | Permalink

    John, regardless of the referendum result, Leave or Remain, will you continue to support David Cameron as Prime Minister?

    Reply I support the Manifesto I fought the GE election on and will wish to implement the wishes of the UK electors if they vote for Brexit. I will judge each issue on its merits in the light of the popular mandates involved.

    • DaveM
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 11:08 am | Permalink

      To reply:

      With honest statements and admirable sentiments like that John, how on earth can you call yourself a politician?!!!!

    • Chris S
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 3:20 pm | Permalink

      Spoken like a true politician !

      Whatever the outcome on Thursday, I’m sure that none of us want to see Osborne moved to the Foreign Office. If it were to be Brexit, and, assuming Cameron clings on, the job has to go to Boris with Gove as Chancellor. We may not be too happy about it but for stability, that would be the best route forward.

      These two Brexiteers will need to run the Cabinet Sub-Committee for Brexit negotiations.

      If it’s Remain, such has been Osborne’s heinous crimes during the campaign that he still needs to go to the back benches.

      Cameron will have to come out saying something conciliatory like ” The people have spoke and although we are to remain in the EU it has to change. We will be working tirelessly to achieve that change starting today”.

      For that he would need a Brexit Foreign Secretary to be even half credible.

  18. Vanessa
    Posted June 21, 2016 at 9:42 am | Permalink

    There is a very good argument on on Sovereignty. He says we are still a sovereign state but that the politicians in the past and present are happy to give our power away to Brussels. Here is a quote:
    “Sovereignty is part of the debate. If it so wished, Parliament could exercise its sovereignty, not over Brussels but over our own government, insisting that that it’s powers were returned.

    Therefore, our argument is not with Brussels. We are held in thrall to the European Union by our governments, but only because Parliament allows it. The people responsible – as a collective – are our MPs. Our argument is with them.

    This actually gives this referendum a very special status. It is our opportunity to address not Brussels but the ranks of politicians – the good, the bad and the ugly. They are so indifferent to their loss of powers, increasingly delegating it to Brussels, that it requires us the people to tell them to get off their backsides and recover them. ”

    I had not thought about it in those terms but now think he is right. We need to kick out all those who are happy to be dictated to by Brussels and tell them they need to make decisions on OUR behalf.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 2:37 pm | Permalink

      Most of our argument is not with Brussels, it is with our politicians. Likewise almost all of our argument is not with legal immigrants, those who have exercised their right to come here and build a better life in a more favourable economic environment, it is with our politicians who have granted them that right.

  19. Mick
    Posted June 21, 2016 at 9:44 am | Permalink

    Totally fed up of the remainers spouting on about to stay in the eu to reform from being in it,Muppets the eu don’t listen and which ever party is in charge of Britain you aren’t going to get any reform, then there’s this nonsense about 2 million Brits abroad at risk if we leave, Muppets there’s more then 70 million waiting in the wings to come here

    • Lifelogic
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 11:12 am | Permalink

      How can it possibly be reformed from within to become more in the UK’s interests? The majority clearly have another socialist super state agenda that is very much against the UK’s interests? And indeed against their interest too. It will break up anyway in the end.

      Many other countries want to leave too.

  20. Jerry
    Posted June 21, 2016 at 9:52 am | Permalink

    “There is no need for any disruption of trade or investment, and no need to change trading rules and product regulations.”

    Not sure the eurocrats will think way, and why would they, doing so would surely only add petrol to troubled waters, first a Brexit gets an easy ride out of the EU but then so does a Grexit, a Spanx, and would not the FN in France not seek to exploit such events, perhaps meaning a Frexit in all but name and the collapse of the entire EU project.

    “A vote for Brexit is a vote to restore UK democracy”

    Rubbish, it will only restore the pre EEC and more importantly pre EP status quo, democracy in any meaningful sense doesn’t exist in the UK, how can it when a government can exist on less than 51% of the popular vote, in some continuances more people did not vote for the MP than did, a government can exist on a mere 34% of the popular vote.

    Re Article 50, the PM wishes to use it, so unless he is challenged and deposed we will be using A50, no questions, but that then begs the question of an early GE and a fresh mandate, but what then if a Europhile party or coalition win, that might even put any meaningful Brexit at risk – a europhile post Brexit government, negotiating a A50 might sign us up to a Swiss or Norway style trade deal, complete with Schengen area free movement, in effect neutralising any of the often suggested advantages of a Brexit!

    Reply There is no need to hold an early GE, which would be illegal anyway under the 5 Year Parliament Act. There will need to be changes of personnel in the government.

    • Mark B
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 12:00 pm | Permalink

      reply to reply

      Not if the required number of MP’s vote for it.

    • eeyore
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 12:30 pm | Permalink

      “There will need to be changes in the personnel of the government.” Thank you, Mr Redwood. I take this as a satisfactory answer to my question posed above about how Mr Cameron might be persuaded to abandon the Article 50 route.

      Guido tells us that 140 Conservative MPs have now declared for Brexit. Of the Remainer MPs, he adds, approximately half are on the payroll, half not. As you mentioned a few days ago, some may change their minds soon. I hope these numbers are sufficient to supply you the firepower you and your colleagues will need in the event of a Leave vote on Thursday.

      Of course Remain MPs are in a large majority overall. It seems inconceivable that a Tory Prime Minister could yet find himself supported in office by Opposition votes – but we live in strange and perplexing times.

      • Jerry
        Posted June 21, 2016 at 5:26 pm | Permalink

        @eeyore: How can the leader of the Conservative party be kept as leader of the party by “Opposition votes”!

        On the figures you cite from Guido, if Cameron wishes to carry on after Friday he appears safe, thus it is also safe to assume that Article 50 will be the method we exit the EU should the country vote for Brexit and people (both those here in the UK and UK expats) and businesses can plan their timetables accordingly. Unless the Tory eurosceptics throw internal party democracy out of the window of course.

        Reply I expect the leadership of the Conservative party to implement the Brexit promises if we win.

        • eeyore
          Posted June 21, 2016 at 7:15 pm | Permalink

          Jerry – of course I’ve no idea what Mr Redwood has in mind, but imagine that if a no confidence motion were tabled and the 140 Brexit Tories vote for it, then Mr Cameron would need Opposition support to survive.

          If he did not get that support his government would fall. The Queen would then send for another MP whom she is advised can command a majority in the House. If no such MP can be found we would face a constitutional crisis. I believe that the Fixed-Term Parliament Act 2011 makes provision for such an eventuality.

          The matter would next be referred to the sovereign people at a General Election. That would produce a new Parliament, from which a new government would emerge. Mr Cameron would presumably be caretaker PM in the interim.

          I am nervous of discussing these matters in the presence of real experts like Mr Redwood and others who contribute here, but I think that’s roughly how things might pan out.

          • Jerry
            Posted June 21, 2016 at 8:55 pm | Permalink

            @eeyore; There would be no constitutional crisis, a five year parliament is not fixed in stone no mater what by the FTPA – if it had then all surviving MPs involved in passing said Act should be sacked along with any members of the civil service involved in drafting what would surely be a pigs ear of an Act The purpose of the FTPA was to bring stability, not stalemate and logjam!

            If the 140 Tory MPs you cite table a no confidence vote in the government and vote for their own motion they are quite possibly signing their own P45’s! No opposition MP is going to vote with Cameron, why the hell would they, their opinion will be to bring about an early GE.

            No one else has enough MPs to form a government, who ever the Queen sends for, not even a minority one that could get a budget through, who is going to support those 140 eurosceptic Tory MPs you talk of, other than perhaps the one UKIP MP. Would the Tory europhiles support a Corbyn lead coalition, would the Tory eurosceptics. A Corbyn lead coalition doesn’t have enough votes unless one or the other sides of the now split Tory party do support him, otherwise Ed Miliband could have formed a coalition with the other opposition parties last year.

          • Edward2
            Posted June 21, 2016 at 11:00 pm | Permalink

            There is a way out of the fixed parliament term act if all agree
            So no need to sack everyone previously involved.

            If a future election is called who can say what the result will be.
            Even PM Corbyn is a possibility.

          • Jerry
            Posted June 22, 2016 at 7:32 am | Permalink

            @Jerry; I was of course talking about those MPs who had not lost their seats in 2015, apologies for any lack use of language above

    • Jerry
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 12:56 pm | Permalink

      @JR reply; ‘Regime change’ in all but name then, and what the hell is ‘democratic’ about that with out a GE, and what hypocritical positions many who post here will be in if they support such a situation having claimed that Mr Brown had no legitimacy between 2007 and 2010. The FTPA could be repealed, just as the European Accession Act can be.

      Reply Entirely democratic, as Mr Cameron made clear before the GE that he would not serve as PM into the next election, so people know there will be leadership change at some point this Parliament and voted accordingly.

      • Jerry
        Posted June 21, 2016 at 5:12 pm | Permalink

        @JR reply; Yes indeed Mr Cameron made it clear that he would not be the leader of the party by the next GE, but his standing down would be at a time of his choosing, otherwise he has to be voted out of office – this would be as much ‘regime change’ many Thatcherites claimed the the fall of Mrs T was at the time and ever since, and in the event of a Brexit vote on Thursday would be an even worse act of inter-factional party treachery, considering that Cameron actually has delivered the Brexit your faction want (Mrs T was deposed because she would not follow the europhiles wishes I seem to remember).

        The new leader only needs to be know, not in office, but even if it was any new leader only needs four months, not four years -indeed four years might be enough time for the new leader to loose the next election, as indeed Mr Brown did for Labour!

    • Sean O'Hare
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 1:25 pm | Permalink

      Reply to Reply:

      Oh so repudiating an international treaty (ECA 1972) is easy-peasy, but repeal of the 5-Year Parliament Act can’t be done?

    • David Price
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 2:48 pm | Permalink

      “There will need to be changes of personnel in the government”

      classic understatment

    • Cliff. Wokingham.
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 3:13 pm | Permalink

      Oh you are right Jerry, you’re always right Jerry.

    • turbo terrier
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 5:21 pm | Permalink


      Oh please be right Jerry. Bring it on

  21. stred
    Posted June 21, 2016 at 10:02 am | Permalink

    I really am beginning to wonder where to emigrate to after the referendum. Whichever way it goes, at least half the population of the UK is bonkers and I don’t want to live here any more. More thasn half of my family included.

    Yesterday I turned on ch 4 news to hear their Indian looking reader having a go at Nij about his poster. He accused him of showing ‘brown faces’ for racist reasons. As I know that Syrians are not any browner than I used to be on my summer holiday and are the same race as myself, I had a look at the poster and most of the faces were not brown. They were almost all young blokes- not children- invited to go to Merkeland.

    Today I turned on the box to hear yet another day of mourning for the Corbynite murder victim and then saw that another British lunatic had fortunately been caught while trying to murder Mr Trump.

    While when asked what they are doing about large numbers of small boats smuggling illegal migrants accross the Channel, as we don’t have any patrol boats left, the Cabinet Office has said that our approach is ‘intelligence based’.

    Any suggestions about the best place to emigrate to?

    • bluedog
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 11:53 am | Permalink

      Germany? Go straight to the top.

    • Jerry
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 1:10 pm | Permalink

      @stred; Comments like the above must be driving people towards Remain, even without the now failed economic case [1] for a Brexit I know that I would find it hard to do anything other than abstain rather than vote for the sort of message that Farage has been sending out during the last week or so, sometimes even holding ones nose is not enough to keep the stench out…

      [1] if we need a trade deal with the EU post a Brexit then we are better off keeping our current status

      • Anonymous
        Posted June 21, 2016 at 3:36 pm | Permalink

        Nigel Farage doesn’t know when to keep his mouth shut but he’s not wrong.

        He could well have blown this referendum having played into the hands of the Remainers.

        You don’t have to vote for his message. It changes nothing about the failure of the EU.

        This is not an election.

        • fedupsoutherner
          Posted June 21, 2016 at 4:25 pm | Permalink

          Agree Anonymous. This is not about party politics. The EU is a big threat to us and our sovereignty and we must still vote out despite what Farage is showing and saying. We cannot allow a poster to stop us vote OUT!!

          • Jerry
            Posted June 21, 2016 at 6:05 pm | Permalink

            @Anonymous; @fedupsoutherner; Trouble is Mr Farage, in the eyes of the general public and indeed media, has been the face of “Mr Brexit” for to long now, people who regularly read this site, watch the (sometimes boring) proceedings on BBC-P know the truth but that is not going to stop people switching their votes because of that poster and the many other bad calls Farage has made.

            As for my on my own personal voting quandary, the economic case for Brexit, I’m still open to be pursued, but all this talk of jumping back into bed with the EU, and as I say perhaps with a worse deal than before Brexit is more frightening than keeping the status quo.

            Sorry but there is no way the career eurocrats will give us an easy Brexit, they will happily sell Germany, Swedish, French industry etc. down the river first in the same way as they sold Greece, Spain and even Ireland down the river, why because they will not wish to give other would be exiters ideas. To do so could end in the break-up of the EU (some German political/economic commentators are saying this even), no career eurocrat is going to sack themselves.

            If we must be in a “trading group” could we not ask to join NAFTA, I’m sure the USA, Canada and Mexico will sell us what we need to import, if not then what can we still buy from our Commonwealth members?

          • Patrick Geddes
            Posted June 21, 2016 at 6:54 pm | Permalink

            Your opinion of the revengeful EU eurocrats and their attitude towards the UK is a good argument for leaving.
            If you have a partner who secretly hates you its best to divorce.

          • Jerry
            Posted June 21, 2016 at 9:11 pm | Permalink

            @Patrick Geddes; Indeed but only a fool cuts their own nose off to spite someone else’s face, and yes you should divorce in such a scenario, but who the hell would then jump back into bed together as soon as the divorce been granted!

    • Mitchel
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 1:32 pm | Permalink

      For those with the pioneer spirit,Mr Putin is offering free land in Siberia to boost the economy out there.Make a go of it and,after five years, the land is yours to do what you like with.Just like the old West of America but with vodka instead of bourbon and snow instead of sand.

  22. Paul Perrin
    Posted June 21, 2016 at 10:30 am | Permalink

    UK does not have the resources to monitor the vast swathes of nonsense coming out of the EU parliament.

    Even the EU parliament don’t have those resources – they pass things they have never read and don’t understand.

    The EU treaties need to be scrapped, future changes to our position cannot be dependent on agreement from the EU (even if we technically have sovereignty).

    1) No EU Law
    2) No EU Fees
    3) No EU Passport
    4) Consumer freedom from the single market

    There must be no future need to refer to the EU on any issue that isn’t directly related to EU/UK trade.

  23. DaveM
    Posted June 21, 2016 at 10:46 am | Permalink

    Sorry John, and sorry to all the regulars here.

    I started wobbling when the PM suggested I was a “quitter” for wanting to Leave. Then Gideon scared me half to death with his unsubstantiated threats.

    Now David Beckham is supporting Remain…that’s tipped me over the edge. Surely remain is the only way forward!!

    Reply Surely Aston Martin and Ian Botham coming out for Leave are the clinchers!

    • DaveM
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 11:09 am | Permalink

      To reply:

      No, but Liz Hurley has got me awfully confused!

      • fedupsoutherner
        Posted June 21, 2016 at 4:26 pm | Permalink

        Dave M. I hope your posts have been done tongue in cheek.

        • DaveM
          Posted June 21, 2016 at 9:12 pm | Permalink

          Come on, I’m sure you know me better than that.

    • stred
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 11:23 am | Permalink

      Could be an own goal for the Remaniacs. It’s the last time I drink his bloody whisky and stink of his aftershave.

    • Cheshire Girl
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 12:20 pm | Permalink

      The fact that the Prime Minister has to enlist the support of someone like David Beckham, doesnt impress me one iota!’ Beckham has his own agenda, and in my opinion it doesnt have much to do with the concerns of ordinary people. I do seem to remember a time when the views of ‘celebrities’ did not influence Government policy, and they were not sought by our Leaders.

      • Roy Grainger
        Posted June 21, 2016 at 3:31 pm | Permalink

        We were treated to a newspaper ad from Richard Branson telling us to Remain today. A good boost for the Leave campaign.

    • zorro
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 12:37 pm | Permalink

      I thought that it was Andrew Lloyd Webber that tipped you over the edge. Mind you, he would tip anyone over the edge!!


      • Mitchel
        Posted June 21, 2016 at 2:12 pm | Permalink

        I think he was hummimg “Any dream will do”when he penned that MoS article.

    • mick
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 12:47 pm | Permalink

      DaveM The only reason he as come out as a remainer is A) he doesn`t live here and B) posh told him to

    • Anonymous
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 3:40 pm | Permalink

      About the only thing David Beckham trains now is that imperious right eyebrow.

      He’s now well and truly part of the lofty champagne establishment. The modern aristocracy.

  24. Remington Norman
    Posted June 21, 2016 at 11:28 am | Permalink


    I have followed your EU/Brexit posts with interest. Unfortunately, your measured take on all this seems largely confined to your Diary. It would seem that, despite Vote Leave’s efforts, Remain’s Fear campaign is likely to triumph. Someone needs to tell Gove, Johnson, Farage and the rest that the issue which must be hammered home in the final two days to give Leave a chance of victory is ‘Who Governs Britain’. To this, all other considerations, important as they are, are subsidiary. If Remain wins, it will be a grievous day for us all.

    Reply I have given radio and tv interviews, live debates, articles in Spectator, City am, Telegraph, Mail, Express etc We are all taking what opportunities present to put over our case. Please help by delivering leaflets.

    • Remington Norman
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 4:34 pm | Permalink


      I wrote to Vote Leave HQ offering to speak (I am good experience of public speaking) but had no reply. I believe that their tactics have been, to some extent, counter-productive. Too late now. Just pray that we win.


      PS Just finished Rowse’s All Souls in my Time – a fascinating read. You passed the year I failed!

  25. Chris
    Posted June 21, 2016 at 11:45 am | Permalink

    Interesting how the evidence on the ground does not fit with the polls. Nigel’s Brexit Bus tour arrived in Clacton to tremendous reception. Also see new bill board launched on the “school overrun”:

    Also the tremendous reception that Farage, Kate Hoey and John Mills got last night at The Sage, Gateshead was wonderful to see. Link on UKIP website. About 14 minutes in to Farage’s speech, where he is describing the Thames flotilla of fishermen and Bob Geldof, he states that Bob Geldof rang Cameron on his mobile phone a few minutes before setting sail. Littlejohn in the Daily Mail says that Geldof’s stunt was endorsed by Cameron, and he also gives the name of the businessman backer of Geldof’s stunt.

    I think for Cameron to have been apparently endorsing this is appalling. Mr Redwood, I really fear that many Conservative Eurosceptic MPs do not wish to acknowledge, or simply do not realise, the real depths to which Cameron and Osborne have stooped in this campaign. Many of the public do realise, and I suspect the others will find out later. Of huge import are the Conservative MPs who know exactly what Cameron has done but they support it. I hold Blair responsible for first corrupting the government, but Cameron seems to be worse than “heir to Blair” and he does not seem to care one bit. Desperate times.

    • Chris S
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 3:55 pm | Permalink

      “Interesting how the evidence on the ground does not fit with the polls”.

      I agree with you on this. The vast majority of people I know are in favour of Brexit. I’ve been posting comments everywhere possible in the last few weeks, even in the Guardian.

      Today there is another article by the odious Polly Toynbee. So far there are more than 4,450 comments posted about it and, while I’m not counting them up, of those recommended, most are in favour of Brexit. Somewhat surprising for Guardian readers.

      One in particular was very insightful and interesting. It’s from a 61 year old graduate, Guardian reading, lady who is in favour of leaving. If we can get people like this on our side, surely we must have a good chance of pulling it off ?

      The antics of Cameron, Osborne, Rudd, Vasey, Corbyn and Co are also helping us.

      Here it the lady’s comment in full. I’ve not identified her as I cannot ask her for permission to use her name :

      “As a 61 year old Guardian reading (but that is currently hanging by a thread) graduate who welcomes immigration I find Polly Toynbee’s hate speech against leavers like myself deeply offensive.

      I and many like me do not subscribe to ‘phobias, conspiracies, fear of foreigners and the politics of paranoid isolation’.I am not ‘stirred by unscrupulous polititions to fear invasions from outsiders’ and do not belong to a homogenous group normally providing ‘ballast’ as PT so sneeringly dismisses individuals within my age group.

      Personally I would not wish to be associated with the leaders of either side of this dreadful and dishonest campaign but for PT to dismiss those of us who have made an informed choice as a consequence of a gears deal of research as ‘anti politics, anti human rights, anti expert and know nothing’ is a disgrace”.

      • Chris
        Posted June 21, 2016 at 8:27 pm | Permalink

        Very interesting and encouraging. Yes, I scan the comments sections of the papers and am struck by the significant number of Leavers on the Guardian, and an even higher proportion on the Indy – not what I expected to find.
        I don’t know if you saw those tweets on Guido about Cameron’s sudden press call outside Downing Street. They were revealing, and one of them suggested to me that all is not plain sailing for the PM. It basically said that Cameron’s words/attitude at that Press call were not those of a man looking at a 10 point lead for Remain in the polls. What does he know that we don’t?

    • DaveM
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 9:29 pm | Permalink

      I don’t know anyone who wants to remain, and I work with a lot of under-25 graduates.

      The Twitter polls – posted by random people – all reflect about 80-20 for leave. Take into account the demographics of those who are most likely to look at them and you can probably reduce that to 55-45. Additionally, comments on any website have been consistently about 5-1 for leave. That includes Guardian, Mirror, and BBC.

      Still….there’s only one poll that counts as they say.

      Boris won the clapometer referendum.

  26. adam
    Posted June 21, 2016 at 11:51 am | Permalink

    We should go in a more technocratic path forward. More scientific advice. more scientific advancement. Lets be at the heart of the biological breakthroughs to come in the next 200 years. Pro tracking and the like, pro high standard of living.
    Anybody with wealth needs to protect it, more border security is needed. much more.

    Lets encourage the UN to take over world oil supplies, giving them something useful to do whilst whelping to stop bad guys funding terrorism and anti western hatred. Oil revenues can instead be used to fund a global aid budget.

    None of this will happen unless we make it happen and lead the way.

    the EU UN sustainable development religion is a very bad idea. Sustdev has no history of ever being tried or working and no real intellectual pedigree. It came from an obscure field called Ecology. Why should the world be held hostage to its fantasies.

    • Jerry
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 1:23 pm | Permalink

      @adam; Lets encourage the UN to take over world oil supplies”

      Cough, never heard of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)?!

      The UN is so far into the AGW and CO2 scam makes the EU look like (the fictional) Ewing Oil Corporation by comparison, the first thing a UN controlled world oil supply policy would do is irrevocably shut down and seal the oil wells.

      • Patrick Geddes
        Posted June 21, 2016 at 2:50 pm | Permalink

        The UN has little power because over 50% of its funding is from the USA
        and they have no legal powers to close down any oil production in any sovereign nation.

        • Jerry
          Posted June 21, 2016 at 6:18 pm | Permalink

          @Patrick Geddes; Except that the OP suggested giving the UN such legal powers over the supply of oil, and second who funds them (and has the lease to the building) will not stop the UN doing as it pleases as it has become a self-fulfilling prophecy, that not even the USA can control, quite the opposite way around in fact, as I suspect Mr Trump will find out should he become President…

          • Patrick Geddes
            Posted June 21, 2016 at 6:58 pm | Permalink

            I dont understand what you are saying.

  27. adam
    Posted June 21, 2016 at 11:52 am | Permalink

    *pro fracking

  28. Atlas
    Posted June 21, 2016 at 11:57 am | Permalink



    Vote ‘Leave’ !!

    Posted June 21, 2016 at 12:33 pm | Permalink

    If Brexit does not occur: it will most likely have been the very last chance UK Parliamentarians will have been positioned and in command to oversee a smooth transition to democratic self-government.

    Should the idea of an exit from the EU arise again, it will be a crisis period.No, I mean a real internal but AN externally generated crisis.
    The Camp which can promise and deliver a future genuine Bill of Rights and Constitution, rather better than the American model, will supplant any crosses on pieces of paper and quaint studio pre-negotiated debates with “leading” figures.
    Entertaining: those audiences in sections banging their hands together like trained sealions clapping their flippers. The circus will be over.

    In such circumstances there will be a written-in-stone American style Second Amendment. Sad. But that’s where Remain Camp’s lies and press manipulation obviously point. Yes it will be their fault. Entirely. They will have changed this country fundamentally and we all will find imperfections in the new model forced upon us despite our best efforts.As in the USA.

    Ex PM The Rt Hon Mr Blair is famous for saying on the Middle Eastern wars “You’ll see, history will prove me right”. He and Mr Cameron’s heads will not be masoned on the White Cliffs of Dover, arguably the UK’s Mount Rushmore. It’ll be somebody honest

  30. Chris
    Posted June 21, 2016 at 12:48 pm | Permalink

    “The hypocrisy of John Major laid bare”
    I have just been sent the following about John Major and his current support for the EU. I don’t think any extra comment is necessary other than it confirms that individuals seem prepared to put principles and integrity on one side and that the truth is only what is “expedient” to say at the time:

    “Huge thanks to Patrick Nicholls who managed to unearth this statement from former Primer Minister John Major, who has intervened on behalf of the Remain side several times throughout this campaign. Strange that, because here’s what he said in 1995:

    “The often unspoken fear of many people – we should address it honestly and clearly and examine it–is that Europe might develop into a super-state, an overarching Government with no national veto, no control over our own borders, prescriptive decisions, a single currency imposed and the nation state retreating to a wholly subordinate role. That fear exists out there… and we should recognise the fact that it exists… I for one would find such a Europe wholly unacceptable for this country. I do not believe that it is remotely likely, but, if that were to be the future, it would not be a future that would be suitable for this country.”– [Official Report, 1 March 1995; Vol. 255, c. 1062.]”

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 2:42 pm | Permalink

      It’s laughable.

      • fedupsoutherner
        Posted June 21, 2016 at 4:30 pm | Permalink

        No Denis, it’s not laughable. It’s enough to make you cry! I just hope we aren’t all doing that on Friday morning.

    • Jerry
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 6:27 pm | Permalink

      @Chris; You point being what, that is a 20 year old transcript, the world has moved on, perhaps the BSE group will dig out some very pro EU comments from 30 years ago by one Mrs T as reason for Thatcherites to vote to stay in!…

  31. Denis Cooper
    Posted June 21, 2016 at 12:53 pm | Permalink

    Off-topic, Migration Watch is taking a more pessimistic line over the economic and financial consequences of uncontrolled mass immigration:

    We would need to be more selective to get any positive benefits.

    • Jerry
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 6:34 pm | Permalink

      @Denis Cooper; Of course Migration Watch will take a more pessimistic view… Unless they do their reason for existing has vanished, a bit like how the RSPCA always issue pessimistic reports on animal cruelty. You name the pressure group or charity and they issue reports that support their reason for existing!

      • Denis Cooper
        Posted June 22, 2016 at 7:00 am | Permalink

        A more pessimistic line than they took previously.

        • Jerry
          Posted June 22, 2016 at 1:32 pm | Permalink

          @Denis Cooper; But they always take a pessimistic line, it’s not news nor news worthy, now if they suddenly turned about and said that there was no problem with migration that would be news!

          If Brexit win, Mr Farage is brought into government and implements his Oz points style immigration system, I bet Migration Watch will still issue pessimistic reports…

  32. Vanessa
    Posted June 21, 2016 at 1:12 pm | Permalink

    In the Express there is an article on the EU and one of the comments tells us that the EU has funded the “Remain in” campaign in Britain to the tune of ( a very large figure ed)

    How dishonest and corrupt can you get ?

    Reply The EU sees nothing wrong in spending some of our money on telling us what a good thing it is.

    • Vanessa
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 1:13 pm | Permalink

      P.S. In case you have forgotten, that money was ours in the first place.

  33. ian wragg
    Posted June 21, 2016 at 2:04 pm | Permalink

    The hypocrisy of John Major laid bare

    Huge thanks to Patrick Nicholls who managed to unearth this statement from former Primer Minister John Major, who has intervened on behalf of the Remain side several times throughout this campaign. Strange that, because here’s what he said in 1995:

    “The often unspoken fear of many people – we should address it honestly and clearly and examine it–is that Europe might develop into a super-state, an overarching Government with no national veto, no control over our own borders, prescriptive decisions, a single currency imposed and the nation state retreating to a wholly subordinate role. That fear exists out there… and we should recognise the fact that it exists… I for one would find such a Europe wholly unacceptable for this country. I do not believe that it is remotely likely, but, if that were to be the future, it would not be a future that would be suitable for this country.”– [Official Report, 1 March 1995; Vol. 255, c. 1062.]

    Taken from Roger Helmers blog

    • turbo terrier
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 4:52 pm | Permalink

      Ian Wragg & John Redwood

      Well done both of you for highlighting and publishing on this blog.

      Of course it could be there was another John Major around in 1995!!

      Like CMD the man is a disgrace.

    • Jerry
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 6:48 pm | Permalink

      @Ian Wragg; See my reply to @Chris above on exactly the same extract from the transcript.

  34. ian
    Posted June 21, 2016 at 2:47 pm | Permalink

    As I said months ago on this blog, wet & mad will crash the economy if he loses the vote, what he means is he will try with his mates but it just the chance they are looking for to save money and cut back in or out of cos bigger cuts if out.

    Posted June 21, 2016 at 3:28 pm | Permalink

    Off topic: The Staff Room

    Mr Cameron, a few hours in advance of the Grand Debate at 8pm BBC tonight has slithered out of number 10 and desperately entered his thoughts into history. Afraid, frit, of Open debate.
    He says we should discuss “at home, in the pub (patronising smile), and in the Staff Room ” at work about the Vote.

    We can see Mr Cameron has visited large enterprises “up and down the country” as he always puts it. It is clear he has never done an ordinary job. Has no idea how people really work. their conditions of life, of work.
    Staff room? Well school teachers have one. Big enterprises have rooms set aside. But in the clerical world, many prefer to stay at their desk, have a lousy cup of coffee from a machine, guard their belongings, have a bite at a sandwich between in-coming phone calls. It takes a third of a half-hour lunch “hour” to get to most times non-existent Staff Room and possible queue or “line-up” for another third of ones time, sit down uncomfortably with near strangers who peer oddly at ones lunch.
    As for factory workers.Easier to sit on a wooden wares pallet, eat a sandwich, drink your own prepared tea, play cards, tell mucky jokes, talk non-pc just for the pure freedom of it.
    Cameron really is in a different world. Staff room indeed!!!

  36. Roy Grainger
    Posted June 21, 2016 at 3:35 pm | Permalink

    The referendum outcome is hard to predict, but it is not hard to predict that eventually an extreme nationalist party of the left or right will come to power in a EU country and they will leave the EU and the whole enterprise will collapse in an uncontrolled way (like the Soviet Union).

    • Chris
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 3:58 pm | Permalink

      I fear that the EU is going to move very swiftly indeed to put in place lots more legislation tightening its grip even further and of course ensuring ever closer union. If there is a remain victory that will give them the impetus to act with a vengeance. The UK will be treated mercilessly, being rendered almost totally subservient to Brussels, because we have “chosen” it. That is what the Remainers don’t seem to realise.

  37. MercuriusLondiniens
    Posted June 21, 2016 at 4:14 pm | Permalink

    The reason why Government lawyers assume that any exit from the EU has to be via Article 50 is that they think any other way out would violate the Treaty of Lisbon. Vote Leave will surely have taken advice on this matter from leading counsel. Is the advice that the proposed course of action is, after all, consistent with the Lisbon Treaty? Or does Vote Leave think that the UK should ignore the terms of an international treaty it signed?

    Reply A vote for Brexit is a vote to renounce the Treaty. We then proceed by Parliamentary means to make the changes we need. The EU is only sovereign in the UK thanks to the 1972 Act.

    • MercuriusLondiniens
      Posted June 21, 2016 at 5:42 pm | Permalink

      Thank you very much for clarifying Vote Leave’s position.

      I have to say, though, that the path you recommend looks perilous. States which unilaterally renounce their treaty obligations usually pay a price for doing so (which is one reason why the UK has not done this in living memory). Yet, on your proposal, we would be seeking to agree new trade treaties with various other states immediately after a revocation. Few experienced treaty negotiators would think this wise.

      Reply The trade Treaties the EU has will novate to us and the rump EU as well. We are not seeking to renounce the trade agreements with the rest of the EU!

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

        Understood. But I thought an important part of the Vote Leave case was that the EU has been unacceptably tardy in negotiating trade deals with other parts of the world. If we leave the EU, we shall have to strike new agreements as an independent state. It would be an impediment in those negotiations that we have reneged (and recently) on a treaty (viz. Lisbon).

    • zorro
      Posted June 22, 2016 at 11:07 am | Permalink
      • MercuriusLondiniens
        Posted June 22, 2016 at 1:15 pm | Permalink

        Yes. It does seem that the course of action Dr Redwood proposes would breach Article 54 of the Vienna Convention, which the UK signed.

        • zorro
          Posted June 22, 2016 at 7:20 pm | Permalink

          No, no, no – read Article 62!


  38. Robert Pay
    Posted June 21, 2016 at 4:29 pm | Permalink

    If this had been the consistent and clearly stated manifesto for Leave – Leave would be doing better. If it is Leave – we must not trigger Article 50!!! Our process potty civil servants must be headed off from triggering it…

  39. David
    Posted June 21, 2016 at 5:42 pm | Permalink

    Is it just me, or is all this fear, uncertainty, and scaremongering just so similar to the infamous Millennium Bug? It’s Y2K all over again: manipulation of the masses for no good reason other than to cash in on depressed markets.

  • 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