Andrew Rawnsley has an excellent column in the Observer today, entitled: “This can’t be left to the Tory party – it’s everyone’s country at stake”. He hits the nail on the head with this paragraph:
The black hole at the heart of the Out campaign is this. After all those years of demanding this referendum, they can’t agree on what the UK would look like if it chose to self-eject from the European Union. And because they can’t agree, they struggle even harder to reassure the uncertain voter that it would be worth the risk. This is the bruise that the In campaign will keep punching. In focus groups of swing voters, there are two phrases that the undecided often spontaneously produce. One is that membership of the European Union gives the UK “strength in numbers”. The other is that Brexit would be “a leap in the dark”, a phrase David Cameron deliberately echoed back to the undecideds in his statement yesterday. Leaping in the dark will surely feel even riskier when the people urging the blindfolded jump are Nigel Farage and George Galloway.
Rather like an old uncle, Nigel Farage says that we must leave the EU so that we are “in control”. Well, a man on a desert island is “in control”. The Leave campaign needs to do more than their oft-repeated “They need us more than we need them” – which is errant nonsense. 27 countries forming the largest trading bloc in the world, versus little Blighty off the coast of the continent, with even the Americans saying we are better off in the EU? And, for example, Japanese car companies likely to shift investment to the continent. Don’t be silly.
The Norwegians are warning us against going for the Norwegian model.
We don’t have a unified model from the Leave campaign. The reason is because if they tried to present a model the wheels would fall off their wagon at a stroke.
* Paul Walter is a Liberal Democrat activist and member of the Liberal Democrat Voice team. He blogs at Liberal Burblings.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Have resignations led to a rethink?
High Fell leaflet watch (2)
No, Leave didn't win the Brexit referendum because of Northern working class voters
Two new Makerfield by-election polls gives Burnham 5 and 12 point leads
Geoffrey Payne
Richard Whelan
David Raw
Tom Reeve
44 Comments
Leavers are fundamentally illiberal as the bulk of arguments appear to be protectionist.
Whether it is restrictions on immigration, closed borders, an end to foreign ownership, favoring British and small business, renationalising industries and public services, stopping offshoring and outsourcing, scrapping TTIP and so on, the arguments the Brexiteers use are fundamentally protectionist.
The major two visions I seem to get from them is either socialist autarky, or a flag waving protectionist British Fortress.
Both are deplorable.
“27 countries forming the largest trading bloc in the world, versus little Blighty off the coast of the continent, with even the Americans saying we are better off in the EU?”
The Americans have one purpose, and one purpose only:
1. To ensure that an anglophile voice is inside the EU making the case for US interests, without which europe be both less a less effective vehicle for US policy ambition and less friendly to boot.
Everything they say about Britain in EUrope is coloured by that ONE objective.
Stimpson.
Why are both stances deplorable rather than say wrong or misguided or either really. All societies as far as I can tell operate certain levels of protectionism and is the EU itself not a protectionist trade block comprised of agreements with European partners. Europe has a lot of restrictions on immigration from outside of the EU and a lot of the nations have recently erected razor why to impose them further.
So far I will be voting to stay in, but really you’ve got to come up with better arguments than accusing people of being deplorable or you are just going to entrench support for the out campaign as well as sowing the seeds of doubt in people who are put off by unsupported, maybe even arrogant, statements.
I get the feeling that many outers still think we are living at the turn of the 20th century, or even earlier, when Britannia ruled the waves and we were still a world power, if not THE world power. We might have the fifth largest economy today; but that doesn’t count in the age of globalisation, where size really does matter.
Don’t waste your time with those who, out of ignorance or cynicism, want out. You won’t change their mind. Concentrate on the undecideds with the vision of a reformed EU, benefitting its citizens rather than just big business, in whose stuttering start towards fundamental change we Brits and, to give him credit, our Prime Minister, have led the way.
…………………Whether it is restrictions on immigration, closed borders, an end to foreign ownership, favoring British and small business, renationalising industries and public services, stopping offshoring and outsourcing, scrapping TTIP and so on, the arguments the Brexiteers use are fundamentally protectionist………………..
That, sadly, is their strength.
I think one of the main problems is neither side have “outlined a cohesive and detailed vision” for the future, in or out of the EU. Who can forget Nick Clegg’s – in the Farage debate – answer to the question what type of EU do you see in 10 years time? After telling everyone throughout the debate how the EU needed to change his answer was “pretty much the same as it is now”. It’s a bit of a leap in the dark either way. All I know is that when I see IDS lining up on one side I want to be on the other – but then I’m stood next to Corbyn and that is just as bad. I do know it would help if both sides came up with some persuasive arguments and stopped the silly scaremongering.
An interesting start on TV this morning. Why didn’t they interview Tim Farron indoors? He looked frozen in Kendal. Mind you, he made some good points and didn’t rubbish Dave C unlike Corbyn the day before. Also, did anyone notice that Hilary Benn wouldn’t say that he would share a platform with the PM? The last thing we need is political preening. I want to see Cameron, Corbyn, Farron and Lucas up there singing from the same hymn sheet instead of trying to score political points!
@ Stimpson – “Whether it is restrictions on immigration, closed borders, an end to foreign ownership, favoring British and small business, renationalising industries and public services, stopping offshoring and outsourcing, scrapping TTIP and so on, the arguments the Brexiteers use are fundamentally protectionist.”
Precisely none of those positions apply to me.
As a supporter of “in” (best to state that at the outset!!) I think actually both sides need to avoid casually putting down the other side of the argument, despite the looney fringe the press will concentrate on their are nuances to both arguments.
With my limited knowledge, we differ to both Norway and Switzerland in that they both have a large trade surplas, although happy to be corrected. In terms of the trade of goods there is no doubt that we buy more from the EU then we sell to it. According to an ONS report (http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/international-transactions/outward-foreign-affiliates-statistics/how-important-is-the-european-union-to-uk-trade-and-investment-/sty-eu.html)
“..causing the UK’s trade in goods deficit with the EU to rise to £77.0 billion.”
The opposite is true of services but not to the same extent (£15.4 billion in the same period).
If some manufacturers moved to the remaining EU States this would potentially widen. However, and it’s a big one, this to some extent supports the arguments of out. Would Germany allow the EU to penalise us when exporting to the rest of the EU when we are such a key part of the European for their exports, a punative import duty the other way would make the UK Car market pretty attractive to non EU competitors if they had an inbuilt advantage over the VW, Audi, Seat etc etc EU based manufacturers. I suspect that commonsense will avoid damaging reciprocal trade tariffs.
Stimpson.
Marx was in favour of free trade because he felt that it hastened the destruction of nations and created antagonism proletariat and the bourgeoisie , thus leading to revolution. Marxism is in fact internationalist and so not protectionist. Protectionism is really a very traditional conservative economic idea based on what works for the benefit to the Nation State.
“Leave” campaign must outline a cohesive and detailed vision for the UK outside of the EU”
If that is true, then I think the IN campaign must also do the same. What will the UK’s role in the EU be when it is faced with a steadily increasing integration and centralisation of control among eurozone countries?
How can we hope to reform the EU when even the smallest demands for change have been met with stiff resistance? What reforms is the UK hoping to implement and how?
@ John Marriott
“I get the feeling that many outers still think we are living at the turn of the 20th century”
And why do you feel that?
“We might have the fifth largest economy today; but that doesn’t count in the age of globalisation, where size really does matter”
Sorry, but how does that sentence make any sense? We are the fifth largest economy in the world and if size really does matter, then surely we will be able to strike even better deals than those already achieved by the likes of Australia, Singapore, South Korea, Switzerland and Norway. I don’t see those suffering from trade embargoes or lack of international clout in ways that holds back their economies in any significant way.
@ Stimpson
“The major two visions I seem to get from them is either socialist autarky, or a flag waving protectionist British Fortress.”
Quite the opposite. The main argument is that with WTO the main reason for staying in the EU, free trade, is now mostly redundant, with tariffs on world trade generally having fallen drastically since it was set up. Most outers are in favour of wider international engagement with a broader range of nations, not just our geographical neighbours. And I haven’t heard of anyone talking about closing borders or an end to foreign ownership.
Glenn.
How many socialists however back free trade? They are all getting in a lather about TTIP and TISA. Equally they seem to think the nation state should be running the railways and postal system, and especially get very annoyed when foreign states are doing it for us!
Equally the biggest complaints about offshoring come from the far left unions!
The chief challenge facing leavers, is that they need to address their fundamental belief, namely the EU will become a superstate. Hence the issue they need to address isn’t so much what Britian will or will not be able to do, based on the past, but what it will and won’t be able to do in the future with a superstate on it’s doorstep. My feeling is that we need look no further than the relationship between China and it’s neighbours and the direction in which that is going…
The Leave Campaign is using TTIP as an example to scare people..Lib Dem Voices own Joe Otten is a passionate supporter of TTIP so why not use the skills of Joe Otten to soften the awful Anti TTIP scare tactics. The pro Europe debate will be sorely lacking if we don’t get down to basics with the voters.
TC,
Much of our economy is based on financial services. It’s not about making things but about shuffling money around. Size, for me, means population, natural resources and land mass, which puts us way behind places like the USA, India, China etc. We haven’t got an empire any more that we can exploit.
Those who want to leave assume that we are still a world power and can do deals as before. They may get right; but what if they are wrong? From the tone of your post you would seem to be an outer. So, there’s really no point in trying to convert you. We shall have to disagree.
@ Glenn – “Protectionism is really a very traditional conservative economic idea based on what works for the benefit to the Nation State.”
That might have been true once, but that factor ceased to epitomise the tories from the end of the corn laws, and by the time they’d finished absorbing liberal MP’s in the early twentieth they had probably become the least protectionist party!
With the utmost respect, if the UK stays in the EU, will the UK still be in any sense sovereign in 15-20 years? As for the UK – perhaps an Australian points-based immigratoin system and fundamentally the power to vote out our government, as opposed to not being able to vote out the other 27 country representatives in the “Council of Ministers”?
Also, still waiting for a point by point rebuttal: http://www.ukip.org/busting_the_eu_myths.
Also please respond directly to this: “As a minister I’ve seen hundreds of new EU rules cross my desk, none of which were requested by the UK Parliament, none of which I or any other British politician could alter in any way and none of which made us freer, richer or fairer.” http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/02/michael-gove-why-im-backing-leave .
Thank you, indeed.
With the utmost respect, has anyone joined/has any joined http://www.grassrootsout.co.uk?
*is anyone planning on joining
@John Marriott
“Size, for me, means population, natural resources and land mass,”
In which case, for example, Russia has the advantage over us. But clearly it hasn’t, because its economy is contracting and it is smaller than the UK in terms of GDP. Likewise Brazil.
“Much of our economy is based on financial services.”
If you call 12% “much”.
“Those who want to leave assume that we are still a world power and can do deals as before.”
It can be observed from looking around the world that independent nations are perfectly capable of making their own deals to mutual advantage with other countries, particularly in the context of current WTO rules.
Newsflash From BBC: “Boris Johnson to campaign to leave the EU” – “http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/feb/21/boris-johnson-eu-referendum-campaign-for-brexit-david-cameron” – thank you,indeed.
(working link) http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35626621
If we do leave what do people think will be the political fall out. UKIP? Tory Party? Lib Dems?
If we do leave the EU, the Lib Dems should pledge to take us back into it.
The result will be close, and there will be an awful lot of people wanting us to return. A Lib Dem government could easily be elected by those against Brexit, especially when we see exactly what damage is caused, when Britain is unable to join TTIP, multinationals pull out of the country, and the far right and far left take over.
You want to renegotiate the treaties? Good luck. I recommend you send Nigel Farage as your chief negotiator. I very much doubt you will get anything without the free movement of people. What do you do while there is no agreement? No trade with the EU?
@Nom de Plume
“What do you do while there is no agreement? No trade with the EU?”
Do you honestly believe that, given the balance of trade figures, Germany would allow that situation to happen. Too many, on both sides of the argument, forget that all measures can be reciprocal. The remainder of the EU would not close the door to UK Trade as doing so would ensure we would respond in kind. Likewise the outers need to explain why the rights enjoyed by so many Brits living and working there will no longer exist. Free movement is enjoyed by a huge number of Brits. If we want our workers to have access to continental jobs then we will need to allow a reciprocal arrangement.
If we talk in doomsday scenarios we will end up in the same situation as the Scottish referendum which was far closer than it should have been. Those who wish to stay need to sell the positives of the EU not just the often overblown negatives of leaving.
Jedi’
I was using conservative in the broader sense rather than the party political sense. Hence the small c. Personally. I’m not massively sold on the free market as an ideal because it sometime seems as much like a utopian belief as dependent on creating better people rather than a better system as Marxism. To me it kind of ignores the people are sort of tribal, want stability and at least in a democracy get to vote accordingly. I’m not a revolutionary and I’m not that interested in any kind of economic idealism either. I’m essentially a relax let it all hang out liberal and proud of it.
@ Steve Way
You fail to understand what a Brexit is. Britain is leaving the EU. All relevant treaties are void. It effects all areas, not just trade. You need a trade agreement (and other agreements). As we saw with the minor concessions Cameron got, these are never easy. EU GDP $18.495 trillion. UK GDP:$2.945 trillion. A large proportion of UK trade is with the EU (all wiki). The UK is important, but not as important as you seem to think.
“The Norwegians are warning us against going for the Norwegian model.”
By “the Norwegians” you actually mean “one Norwegian”, since the article you link to, though claiming to report the views of “Norway”, actually quotes just one bloke. Admittedly the bloke in question is Norway’s Europe minister, but nevertheless he’s still only one bloke. So that would be like some foreign paper quoting the views of David Lidington (who I confess I had never heard of until I just looked him up!) and claiming he speaks for the whole of the UK.
Polling data suggests about 70% of Norwegians prefer to stay out of the EU.
@RC
“If that is true, then I think the IN campaign must also do the same.”
Agree. To give two obvious examples, and referring specifically to the Lib Dems, how should the EU respond to the refugee crisis? Few answers are ever forthcoming. Should the EU expand yet further? Again it’s impossible to know what the Inners of the Lib Dems think. Though LDV published some articles a year or two back strongly in support of Turkey joining, just the other week they were attacking UKIP for, er, suggesting that Turkey might be allowed to join.
I predict an extremely unedifying and poor quality campaign from both sides here, with the negativity of the In group just about winning through over the negativity of the Out group, purely through fear of change.
@Nome de Plume
It’s not that I don’t understand it’s the figures in black and white. We will not leave the EU overnight. There will be a transition period where trade agreements will need to be made. Both the UK Government and some of the EU states (notably the French) will rattle Sabres but in the end there is mutual benefit to allowing trade to continue.
The remainder of the EU will not want to lose the surplus of their trade with us and we will not want to lose access to their goods. Looking at the total GDP of the EU is irrelevant in many ways to continued trade. The powerhouse of the EU is Germany look at their exports to us.
Where the total GDP of the EU counts is in trade outside of the EU. Which is precisely one of the areas those of us who are pro EU should be highlighting. To repeat I sincerely feel that scaremongering will lose this referendum.
@ Stuart
The Norwegian model (EFTA) is not on offer. It includes paying into the EU budget and free movement of people.
@Nom de Plume I also wonder how the highly intellectual Champions of Sovereignty will explain to their more down to earth get-out-them-Poles supporters the persistence of these same Poles under the subsequent Norwegian model.
But, of course, who cares about the future? Comrade Lenin liked to quote Napoleon, something like “Let’s start the battle, and then we’ll see what to do”. I have spent the first 30 years of my life in what has come out of this philosophy, and I don’t wish anyone, particularly the people of this fair land, to go through this.
@ Stuart (again)
It is unlikely that Turkey will join any time in the foreseeable future. Other countries are far more skeptical than some LibDemers. I personally think it is much further away from joining than it was a few years ago. I just hope it doesn’t get drawn into the Sunni/Shi’a conflict in Syria.
@ Igor – “I also wonder how the highly intellectual Champions of Sovereignty will explain to their more down to earth get-out-them-Poles supporters the persistence of these same Poles under the subsequent Norwegian model.”
You make the mistake of assuming outers have the same panoply of motivations. they do not.
I am one of those champions of soveriegnty, and i have a polish wife.
@jedibeeftrix If you think a bit about what I said, you will see that I don’t see all Outers (actually, nor all Inners either) the same. I say there are people (usually, more intellectually developed) who think about sovereignty and other lofty matters. However, they are now in bed with others who can only think about the Poles (and “Poles”) “threatening their English culture” (I am quoting a former neighbour from when we lived in England). Since you are one of the former, pray tell us, how will you explain to these erstwhile comrades, whose votes you needed so much, why do they still have to suffer from the “Poles” and “Romanians in donkey carts” under the Norwegian option? Or even the Swiss option?
@Philip With the utmost respect, if the UK stays in the EU, will the UK still be in any sense sovereign in 15-20 years? (21st Feb ’16 – 4:36pm)
It is a good question and one that the Leave campaign cannot answer either, because we can be sure that any attempt to rejoin the EU is likely to be on terms distinctly less favourable than the terms agreed between England and Scotland in 1706…
If a cohesive and detailed vision is anything like the LIbDem argument for why we must join the Euro, then perhaps pie in the sky thinking is the more coherent argument.
In your world you know that you are right, that you alone have all the answers, and that just the evocation of generalisms is all that is needed, only your opponents have to make definitive arguments apparently
Let’s play a little game, every single LibDem told morons like me in UKIP that not joining the Euro would be a disaster for this country. Now I might be a moron unable to understand the complicated nature of the issues, but it seems to me that we didn’t join the Euro, and the country didn’t collapse economically. So did the morons actually have the intellectual ability to understand the risk of joining, whilst our self appointed intellectual superiors were blinded to the risks by dogma.
Would any of you like to apologise for getting it monumentally wrong on the Euro and catastrophically wrong on the ERM, or do you somehow believe you are still the font of all received wisdom.
Raddiy,
You’re the one making generalisation and insulting people. No one is claiming to be intellectual superiors. Dude, you just have a chip on your shoulder
@ Igor – “However, they are now in bed with others who can only think about the Poles (and “Poles”) “threatening their English culture” (I am quoting a former neighbour from when we lived in England).”
I don’t consider myself to be in bed with these types. They are not my ‘people’, they don’t share my aims and expectations, I do not share a platform with them. In short, I have no need explain anything to them. Not least because I am not associated with any campaign in the referendum, just as I am not associated with any party.
Maybe I misunderstood your; “highly intellectual Champions of Sovereignty” in referring to people generally. Do you talk specifically about members of Leave.eu?
Do you feel obliged to answer for hard-core federalists, and the post-nation-state self loathers?
@Glenn “Raddiy,You’re the one making generalisation and insulting people.”
It took less than two minutes to Google this from Rayleigh Lib Dems (and I was only Googling “lib dems join euro” before 2005): “I find myself wondering when they will dump that other foolish pledge – not to join the euro.” and “Sovereignty is an issue often raised but rarely discussed intelligently.” (http://www.rayleighlibdems.org.uk/?m=200007) Interestingly, I also see that the ‘3 million jobs’ claim was being used in 2000 to defend joining the euro.
I’m sure that insults were traded by both sides, but Raddiy probably has some justification for his feelings.
More importantly, Raddiy raises a significant point: those campaigning to remain in the EU will need to address claims by the other side that “you were wrong before”.
Peter,
so because one or two people say one or to things every Liberal is this “every single lib dem” and guff about “self appointed intellectual superiors” etc. As a lib Dem I can honestly say that I did not ever agree with the single currency argument, but accept that it was party policy. I’ve also seen plenty of Lib Dems admit they got it wrong. What this dude is doing is making unsupported generalisation about “every Lib Dem” saying this or doing that. I never call anyone a moron ever unless they nearly run me over!
Raddiy has been a regular commentator LDV and almost invariably bangs on about how he’s being oppressed by “lefties, liberals and uncle Tom Cobley an all” usually by lumping everyone into a big amorphous blob so he has something to plant his straw man rhetoric in.
@ Glenn
I don’t have to go very far into any blog on this site to turn up opinion on the issue of the EU, namely that those of us who don’t subscribe to the dogma of LibDem thinking on all matters EU are somewhat intellectually challenged in being incapable of understanding the issues. Labelling myself a moron seemed to be a reasonable self description under the circumstances
You did not consider the UK joining the Euro a good thing, but supported it anyway because it was party policy. Do you always go against what you think is best for the country by letting others make your decisions for you, especially when those same individuals were disastrously wrong on the ERM.
If you dissent on EU policy, then let’s hear your view.
Let’s hear your reasoning why you put party above the likely economic reality of joining the EURO.
Surely the disaster of the ERM, and the impact it had on hundreds of thousands of ordinary people, many who lost their homes through double digit interest rates might have focused your mind. Wasn’t that warning enough, yet within a couple of years the LIbDems had a collective memory loss and were full blooded again in their support of doing it again by joining the EURO.
Since there is no Leave EU LibDem campaign alone amongst the political parties, I would suggest I am quite entitled to cobble you all together on this issue, as there are clearly no dissenting voices.
I don’t feel oppressed by anybody, I fight a corner on the issues individually,
No Raddiy.
I didn’t support it. It just wasn’t a deal breaker. Your arguments are reductionist. Why do parties need separate campaigns for example. What if you don’t see it as a party political matter? There are plenty of people who will continue to vote for other parties despite disagreeing on the EU. You lump everyone together because it makes your invective easier. All you are doing is “you peopling”.
@ Glenn
Thank you for the backhanded compliment.
If being a reductionist means that I have the clarity of vision on the potential damage a particular course of action will have on my fellow citizens, and how it will impact on their economic well being, then I am a loud and proud reductionist.
” It just wasn’t a deal breaker’
I assume that means you just kept your mouth shut, and didn’t rock the boat, all for the greater good I suppose. I wonder how many damaged families made homeless or unemployed because of the ERM would you consider a deal breaker? A few thousand, a few hundred thousand, perhaps a million, or is there no upper limit, no price too high.
http://www.theguardian.com/business/2012/sep/13/black-wednesday-bad-day-conservatives