Yesterday I honoured my speaking commitments which had been planned with the referendum in mind but talked about other matters. The student debate became a discussion of our democracy, and a business audience were happy to think about the global economy. Today Vote Leave and I have cancelled the walkabout and speech by Michael Gove planned for Wokingham Town centre.

My newspapers tell me that the IMF despite the change of mood in the UK has decided to release its assessment of the UK economy. It has produced a flagrantly political intervention, claiming a bleak future if we leave the EU and a continuing good future if we stay in. I read its own website, which flags the UK report with a picture of Westminster in the rain at its mast head. This is a most unfortunate decision, which demeans the institution.

The forecast assumes that the rest of the EU will be willing and able to impose new barriers on their trade with us in an act of self harm, at a time when the IMF thinks the Euro area economy is weaker and more exposed to troubles than the UK one. I think this very unlikely. No-one explains exactly how and why they will do this. The German government has never said it wants any new tariffs or non tariff barriers, and they tend to lead the EU’s response to such issues.

It assumes there will be a confidence affect as well, when the leading inward investors to the UK with factories here have made clear they are going to stay as the UK workforce, domestic market and export base suits them. They have the contacts they need with the rest of the world through our airports, seaports, the English language, our liquid financial markets, and high standards of corporate governance and dispute resolution. So far the various short term forecasts cited by the IMF to talk down the pound, to talk interest rates up and to talk the UK into an early recession have failed. Sterling is a bit higher against the dollar than at the end of February when the referendum campaigns got into gear, and government borrowing rates are well down on the opening levels of 2016.

The IMF rightly highlights the weak UK balance of payments position as a negative for the economy. It does, however, point out that part of the reason for this is low returns on UK investments abroad, which it thinks might improve in due course. The IMF does not point out the UK’s large net contributions to the EU are also an important part of the balance of payments deficit which would immediately improve once we cancel the contributions, as we will if the country decides to leave. Nor does it stress that the UK enjoys a trade surplus with the rest of the world, but a large deficit with the rest of the EU. This again underlines how any new barriers to trade would be more damaging for the EU than for the UK.

Today I turned up for a debate about the referendum for students that I had agreed to do. At my suggestion we decided to pay tribute to Jo Cox and to talk about why democracy matters, instead of rehearsing the arguments for and against EU membership.

I said:

Murder always brings out great grief. The needless brutality affects us all. The sense of loss is greater as a life is often cut short which would have many years to run.

The murder of someone on public service brings out a general public grief.

We mourn as a community anyone of our military killed on active service.
We mourn as a society any police man or woman murdered during the course of their duties.
And we mourn as democrats any MP killed when doing their work to represent us.

We mourn intensely and together, men and women of all views and parties, united in this collective grief.

When an MP is attacked it is important that we do not let these crimes create barriers between MPs and those we represent.

The job can only be done with access for constituents with problems and views. It needs regular contact between MP and constituents.

I was shocked and appalled by the tragic murder of Jo Cox yesterday. I send my condolences to her family. We have all lost a great lady who worked hard for her constituents and our wider democracy.

There are also crucial issues to understand about how the asymmetric single market did damage to Uk industry. When we joined the EEC, now the EU, in 1973, more barriers to trade had been pulled down in manufacturing than in services. EU rules were often such that UK industry was badly damaged by the shock of joining and the continued shock of staying in as the rules increased and tightened.

When the UK joined the EU we had a 45 million tonnes a year steel industry. Today we are battling to save an 11 million tonnes industry.

When we joined the EU we had a 400,000 tonnes a year aluminium industry. Today we have just 43,000 tonnes of capacity left.

When we joined the EU we had 20 million tonnes of cement capacity. Today we have 12 million tonnes.

Just before we joined the EEC in 1971 we had a 1 million tonnes a year fishing industry. Today we have 600,000 tonnes.

The October 2013 government “Future of Manufacturing” Report shows that between 1951 and 1973 metals output rose 3% a year. Since joining the EEC/EU it has declined by more than 6%

Between 1951 and 1973 food and drink output rose by 5.6% per year. Since joining the EEC/EU it has fallen by 1% a year.

Between 1951 and 1973 textiles output expanded at 2.6% a year. Since joining the EEC/EU it has fallen by more than 6% a year.

Whilst it may not be fair to blame all this decline on membership of the EU, as there are other factors, it nonetheless shows categorically that joining the EU and helping create the so called single market has not helped us grow and has not saved many of our industries from decline.

In some cases EU policies are the main driver of the disaster. The Common Fishing Policy is clearly the main reason for the dreadful decline of our fishing industry, as many foreign vessels were licenced to take our fish. Our energy intensive businesses were often damaged by the high energy prices required by the EU common energy policy.

The EU has prevented UK subsidy of industry under its state aids rules, but has often provided subsidised loans and grants to businesses to set up elsewhere in the EU. The UK has seen a spate of factory closures balanced by new and expanded facilities in poorer EU countries. The UK lost van production to Turkey, car capacity to Slovakia, chocolate to Poland, domestic appliances to the Netherlands and the Czech Republic and metal containers to Poland amongst others in recent years. In various cases there was an EU grant or loan involved in the new capacity.

Looking at our huge balance of payments deficit today in goods with the rest of the EU, we can see the long term impact of the EU’s damage to our manufacturing capacity.

This April’s balance of payments figures show us in heavy deficit in machinery, vehicles, electrical machinery, mineral fuels, plastics, iron and steel, wood and clothing. Last year our total goods trade deficit hit £85 billion with the rest of the EU. Between 2008 and 2015 our exports grew at 5% with the rest of the world, whilst falling with the EU.

Perhaps remain might like to answer the following questions:

Why have we suffered industrial decline and closures with production shifting elsewhere in Europe since joining the EEC?

Why do trade in surplus with the rest of the world but have such a huge deficit with the EU?

Why have we ended up importing fish, electricity, steel and much else when we used to self sufficient?

Today UK shares are up and the pound has rallied a little against the dollar. That is probably not what the Chancellor had in mind.

Despite all the efforts of the Treasury, other world governments, the IMF and various economists to talk the UK down on fears of Brexit, markets are just not doing what they wanted them to do.

Remain  seems to have given up on their short term forecasts of higher government borrowing rates, as these rates have plunged along with other sovereign bonds around the world. Clearly there is no strong Brexit affect on UK ones.

The pound hit a low this year of $1.385  at the end of February when the markets did not think Brexit at all likely. Now they think Brexit is much more likely, with a probability to them of around 40%. This would imply the pound should now have fallen around 40% of their  anticipated fall for Brexit, but instead it is at $1.41 today, still above its February low.

The share market hit a low of 5536 (FTSE 100) on February 11th this year, well before markets thought Brexit possible. Today it is at 5973.

 

So now we know what the plague of locusts looks like. The latest threat from Remain is an emergency budget backed by Mr Osborne and Mr Darling to slash spending and raise taxes. This despite both main parties pledges on spending in the NHS.

The proposed tax rises would be illegal under Mr Osbornes own past legislation put through to assure people there will be no   tax rises this Parliament in the main taxes.

This must be the last absurd threats of the  Grand coalition of senior Labour people and Remain Conservative Ministers battling to save the unpopular EU from the common sense of the British people. I along with many other Conservative MPs see no need for any such horror budget and would not vote for one if Mr Osborne was silly enough  to try. As we will be better off out of the EU the post Brexit measures will include spending more on the NHS and abolishing VAT on fuel.

 

How much more damage will we allow the EU and its so called single market do to British business and our jobs and incomes?

There are several important facts about the EU’s single market that Remain do not recognise.

 

1. Since it was completed in 1992 the UK’s trade in goods has not grown with the rest of the EU.
2. Between 1951 and 1972 when the UK first joined the EU manufacturing output rose 4.4% a year. Since we joined the EEC/ EU there has been no growth in UK manufacturing.
3. The trade of non EU countries with no special trade deals with the EU like India, China and the USA has grown more quickly with the EU than our trade from inside it.
4. The government’s own foresight report said that “Output and productivity growth (of UK manufacturing) was reasonable 1951-73” and worse after we joined the EU.
5. The main advantage of the single market, that there are common rules and specifications for all 27 other EU countries making it easier to sell into the market, applies whether the exporter to the EU is in or out of the EU itself.
6. The EU never completed its single market in services. The danger is that as it does so its rules and regulations will damage the UK rather than assist us. The City is often in dispute with the EU over its proposed rules.
7. The single market has been used to add on all sorts of other laws, taxes and obligations which the UK does not want and have little to do with trade.
8. The Germans and others see the Euro as an integral part of the single market and are not happy about the UK being permanently out of it.
9. You can trade quite happily with the single market without being in it as a member.
10. The EU’s trade agreements with a range of smaller countries will automatically apply to both the UK and the rest of the EU as the original parties, if we leave.
11. Much of world trade is not under any special trade arrangements.

 

 

 

 

Remain and the Treasury like to attribute all market moves to hopes and fears of Brexit. They  should be thrilled to be proved wrong on government interest rates. They  said they would go up if Brexit seemed likely.  Instead, as  pro Brexit  polls have improved since the turn of the year UK government borrowing rates have plunged. The 10 year rate is down from 2 % to 1.2%, a fall of 40 %. Bond prices have surged.

 

Trying to talk us into higher rates has not worked.

When we remove the hated tampon tax and VAT on fuel, we boost family incomes and help tackle fuel poverty. In the EU we are not allowed to do that, as they control some of our taxes.

 

We need to take back control over taxation. The European Court has made us pay back huge sums of company tax we have collected from large companies, as they can override Parliament’s wishes on how much tax companies should pay. Out of the EU we will avoid this unhelpful interference. Last Parliament we had to pay back £7,000 million, and the Treasury forecasts the same again this Parliament – or more. We need that money for the NHS.

 

Our trade is not at risk. They sell us more than we sell them. Germany has no wish to see higher tariffs and barriers against her cars, nor France against her food and wine. As they do not want to stop their trade with us, they understand they cannot impose new tariffs against our sales to them.

 

We are constantly asked what model of trade arrangements will we have on leaving. Our campaign has never wanted the Norwegian or any other foreign option. We will have the British model. It will be very similar to current arrangements, as Germany and the other leading exporters to the UK have no wish to damage their trade.

 

We are told we will lose the main advantage of the single market, that it offers common standards and specification making it easier to supply. On the contrary, that remains true whether we are in or out. The USA and other exporters to the EU benefit from the common standards without being members and without having to pay the fees for belonging.

 

We are told we will lose global influence if we leave. On the contrary, we will gain. The UK will retake her seat at the top tables of the world where the EU has replaced us. Instead of having to compromise and agree out positon on trade matters or climate change issues with 27 other EU countries, the UK will be a full member of the global body with our own vote and voice.

 

It is not unusual for the main global bodies and the Uk Treasury to all agree the same or similar forecasts – they rely on common data and common assumptions, and often copy from one of the other’s models. Nor is it unusual for their group think to be wrong. They failed to predict the recession and huge damage done to the UK economy by the European Exchange Rate Mechanism, they failed to see the Great Crash of 2008 coming, and they recommended the Euro. With a forecasting record like that I see why many people do not now believe their long term forecasts for the UK out of the EU.

 

Out of the EU we can take back control of our borders. With controlled immigration we can cut the downwards pressure on UK wages and ease some of the pressures pushing up house prices. We need to relieve the pressures on our public services brought on by uncontrolled immigration.

 

Out of the EU the government will no longer have to dissemble over Turkish visas and Turkish membership of the EU

 

 

The closest any of my Remain opponents in debate have come to saying anything nice or positive about the EU is their occasional claim that the EU is about peace in Europe.

I agree with that aim, but fail to see how the EU has created or helped it. Peace came about following a bruising world war, when a newly democratic Germany and democratic France emerged from the violence and decided to co-operate with each other, under the security umbrella provided by a US led NATO. The leading western democracies have no wish to invade each other again or to annex the smaller countries, whether the UK is in the EU or out of it.

My fear is that as the EU seeks to develop its military arm and to assert itself in foreign policy, it will become a force for instability as we have seen in the Balkans and the Ukraine. I do not wish the UK to be dragged into far away conflicts by an EU that has more ambition than strength or commonsense to follow it through. There is no need for a rival to NATO.

For the rest of it, the Remain case is an increasingly absurd barrage of extremely pessimistic forecasts. Most of them are based on the idea that we are in a Union with a group of  very unpleasant states who will wish to damage us so much that they will happily bring their own economies down in the process should we dare to leave.

Listening to the German Finance Minister in the bits of his recent intervention that did not get reported much he made clear that if the UK despite his warnings and advice does leave he will want to sit down and sort out how to continue Germany’s very profitable trade with us. The  day after we vote to leave the rest of the EU’s rhetoric will change from mild threats and insincere protestations of love for us if we stay, to a strong wish to save as much as possible of the strong links and collaboration there is across the Channel.

Remain have fallen in the polls the more they have relied on bullying to get people to vote for them. They have fallen in the polls as their tv spokespeople have turned to personal abuse and false allegations, instead of helping Leave inform the public of how the EU works and what the future might be like under either scenario.

I have not spent my time painting lurid portraits of what Remain might be like if we had a more serious re-run of the 2011 Euro crisis or if the European banks get into worse trouble,  for two reasons. One, I do not want it to happen as it would  be damaging to so many people. Two, I think it more likely the Euro area will muddle through with slow growth and a gradual move to the richer countries sending more money to the poorer countries and accepting more debt write offs as they need to do.

Nor have I spent my time in full flow thinking through some of the worst scenarios we could get into as the EU tries to flex its limited military muscle. Again I do not wish to see that happen, and it is not the base case.

Meanwhile, all Remain does is invent ever more absurd ideas with huge figures plucked out of thin air. What a pity they have no positive vision of life in the EU for the UK. They spend most of their time denying how much it already does. They refuse to discuss the next moves to a Euro Treasury and political Union. They only seem proud of the fact that we  are  neither in the Euro nor in Schengen, two of the central pillars of the modern EU. Often these are the same people who used to tell us we did have to join the Euro.

If even Remain does not want to join in major parts of the EU, why hang around arguing with the other members who want to get on with their fuller Union?