The title of this article is perhaps a little ambiguous, I admit. As of now, there is no unified “OUT” Campaign. However, in the last week, a number of key voices have been positioning themselves making their views clearly known and balancing what they’ve said is the key purpose of this piece.
The Bruges Group met on 1st June at which John Redwood (Tory “EUsceptic”), Tim Aker and Peter Oborne (former Telegraph journalist, now Associate editor of The Spectator) spoke. Then, on Tuesday, the Telegraph published a forward-looking article from Daniel Hannan, well known EUsceptic Tory MEP, and yesterday Survation published the results of a poll conducted for British Future, which is an independent, non-partisan think-tank engaging people’s hopes and fears about integration and migration, opportunity and identity. Finally, today, the Telegraph reports an interview with our leader, Nigel Farage, on this very topic.
Bruges Group
I am grateful to Robert Henderson, one of our regular authors, for reporting on the Bruges Group meeting. His full report, albeit heavily laced with his own opinions, can be read on his “England Calling” Blog.
Apparently, John Redwood was so out of touch with the feeling of the audience that he came close to being booed, committing what looked like an amazing volte face. Robert reports that:
Redwood asked the audience to trust Cameron’s honesty in his attempt to renegotiate Britain’s relationship with the EU and put forward a plan for the OUT campaign which side-lined Nigel Farage. Redwood said that he believed in Cameron’s honest intent in his negotiations with the EU. Consequently, he would not make up his mind whether to vote to leave until Cameron had completed his negotiations. He also said explicitly that he would vote to stay in if the renegotiations were successful.
So, it appears that he is one of a number of people who want to see what Cameron’s “renegotiations” bring before starting an “Out” campaign.
Peter Oborne’s speech largely consisted of backing up Redwood’s objections to Farage and Redwood’s plans for the OUT campaign.
Tim Aker dealt pretty roughly with Redwood whose position on Cameron’s sincerity he treated with undisguised incredulity. Tim’s speech basically rehearsed most of the arguments for the “Out” Campaign:
- Immigrants reduce the wages of the low paid
- The unemployed of other EU states are being dumped on the UK
- The need for positive patriotism
- A vote to remain in the EU would betray future generations
- Billions in Aid went to foreigners while some of our own people went to food banks
- England was being Balkanised through the introduction of city regions
Robert Henderson reports that Tim’s speech produced in Redwood and Oborne the kind of facial expressions that people adopt when they have encountered an unpleasant smell.
Daniel Hannan
UKIP are often perceived as being negative about the impact of the EU. On the other hand, Hannan’s article provided a positive vision of Britain outside of the EU. The picture he painted included:
- Britain trading with the whole world.
- London’s financial institutions booming.
- A revival of key industries with the removal of restrictive EU Directives.
- Immigration is viewed positively, the limits being keenly debated each year.
- Britain taps into its huge shale gas and oil reserves, leading to cheaper energy.
- We become optimistic about our place in the world: 5th largest economy, fourth military power, G8 member, permanent UN Security Council seat, home of the world’s greatest city and most widely spoken language.
Hannan has to be a key component in the “Out” Campaign for sure,
Survation/British Future Poll
Yesterday, the British Future sponsored survey hit the streets. This contains a number of key messages. Significantly, Survation’s polling revealed:
…public distrust of two of the referendum’s loudest voices – Tony Blair and Nigel Farage… Tony Blair is the least-trusted politician in the EU debate, followed closely by Nigel Farage…
Nearly six in ten (59%) people distrust the former Prime Minister when he talks about whether Britain should remain in the EU, with just 28% saying they trust him on the issue, according to the poll. Mr Blair is even distrusted by those whose views on Britain’s EU membership align closely with his own: only 42% of those who say they are definitely voting ‘in’ trust the ex-Labour PM, compared to 46% who say they distrust him.
Nigel Farage does not fare much better, with 54% saying they don’t trust him on the EU debate, and just over a third of the public (36%) saying they do. Although the UKIP leader is trusted by three-quarters (74%) of those definitely voting ‘out’ in an EU referendum, he is such a polarising figure to non-Ukippers that support for the EU has actually increased while UKIP has grown in prominence..
In terms of the actual voter preferences, it had this to say:
Most have a preference but remain uncertain: they are the ‘Leaners’, with 31% saying they are “leaning towards voting to stay in the EU” and 28% “leaning towards voting to leave the EU”. Both say they want to know what the conditions are before making up their minds. 13% simply can’t choose, answering ‘don’t know’
Surprisingly, their poll shows that the man most trusted in this whole affair is Cameron (with 49% trusting him), but…
The PM remains distrusted on Europe by 41% of the public, predominantly those whose minds are firmly set for ‘in’ or ‘out’. Cameron’s appeal is strongest among the ‘Leaners’.
The key message is that there are an awful lot of “leaners” who need swaying, and at the moment they trust Cameron more than Farage or Blair.
Nigel Farage
Today, the Telegraph published an interview with Nigel in which he says “Let me lead the ‘out’ campaign in the EU referendum”
Nigel shows a certain impatience with voices like those of Redwood and Oborne:
“The No campaign needs to get itself moving. All this nonsense from very snobby Tories that we should not dominate the campaign and I should go on holiday for six months – forget it!”
In terms of UKIP’s plans to get the Campaign going, the interview reports that Nigel will launch a campaign at a meeting with UKIP activists today. He will say:
“We are going to take the lead, we are going to get cracking. But we will at all times invite others to come along and share the platform with us. We will be launching a massive series of public events and meetings all over the country starting in September. These will be public meetings. They will be live web streamed. We are going to be busy, delivering leaflets through the doors by the million. We are not prepared to stand around and wait.”
Conclusion
The “drip, drip, drip” of continuous Pro-EU propaganda from the likes of the BBC, Murdoch’s media empire, a majority of MPs and Ministers, the EU itself and outfits like British Influence is there already.
I am certain that more will join in the debate over how the “Out” (or “No” if you prefer) campaign will be run, and who will lead it, but Nigel is right on one thing:
Whoever leads it, the campaign to save Britain has to start right now.
The OUT campaign needs to be diverse. Whichever way you look at EU membership it does not make sense. To win the No/Out campaign needs to unite those whose opinions on other social, political and economic matters may diverge. This campaign is quite unlike the general election. It is a single issue on which those form all points on the normal political left-right spectrum and from all socio-economic strata can unite. the question really is about whether supra-national unaccountable government is a better way to govern Britain over the next half century or so than sovereign parliamentary democracy.
Peter,
To my mind the best contribution I have read to this subject so far.
Now find us the overall mastermind who will articulate this view nationally and implement the means to allow it to go in operation and reach not just politicians and the media, but the unknowing and apathetic people who will actually be doping the voting.
This is absolutely BASIC
Britain was taken into the EEC/EU by a cross party stitch up, and I feel that it will have to be a cross party effort to get us out.
It is interesting that the pro-EU Daily Mail is trying to stir up trouble between UKIP and other pro-withdrawal party activists – it would much rather see anti-EU people fight each other. The Mail is basically interested in cheap sensationalism that sells copies (e.g. manufactured controversies about transsexuals and the woman whose dog won Britain’s Got Talent), but it is also no friend of UKIP.
I would hope to see UKIP agree to disagree on lesser points with those who are sincerely anti-EU but for now in the wrong party. Mr Otridge is right that we need to get cracking with the real fight now.
Have you been lying low Brian or are you now back from Australia.
Anyway, good to see your timely and sensible contribution ot this obviously very vexed and vital. question of who should lead and what form should the campaign for OUT take.
Regarding content, I`ll hold my fire at the moment, but regarding leadership;
please correct me if I`m wrong, but I think I heard on the Andrew Marr programme this morning from Philip Hammond, that the Electoral Commissioner will appoint the leader of both the “Ins” and “outs”
My only real problem with this is that the Government, Media and their lackeys have already jumped the gun and their campaign is in full swing
and……….that “he who pays the piper calls the tune”
and whether seemingly independent or not all “Agencies” must be paid by someone, if it`s the Government, controlled through a cypher Parliament, who are controlled by an unelected and hostile commission then………………………………..?
Oh! we wouldn`t have this referendum at all if it wasn`t for UKIP ably led by Nigel
Peter Hitchens blog today tells us –
” Oh, and talking of defeat, spending rules for the referendum have already been cleverly devised so that the ‘Yes’ side can spend up to £17million, while the ‘No’ side will be limited to £8million. It’s done by giving each political party an allocation, on top of the equal limits for the actual campaigns.
And a law which would have banned pro-EU promotions by public bodies in the last 28 days of the campaign has been quietly dropped. All this goes on undiscussed.”
If true – it ought to be discussed. It’s disgusting!
This is just the beginning, Bernard. We have all got our work cut out, that’s for sure. One thing concerns me is that the pro-EU campaign’s slogan will be something like “Love Europe” to try and take the emotional initiative (suggesting if you don’t like the EU you “hate’ Europe). The anti-EU must take the initiative here with an “I Love the UK and Europe (but not the EU)” [or something a bit snappier than that!])
” EU TRASH ”
“EUROPE OK”
It is true and what is clear is that the moves made so far would have taken some time to plan. There can be only one person behind it. It must be Cameron.
The problem lies with the media – primarily radio and TV but the newspapers and blogs too because they are what make the opinion and influence the line to be taken by the ‘talking-head experts’ and interviewers on the media. They need a single expert who they can trot out in all their ‘balanced’ product – they want the leader – the organ-grinder not what they see as his monkeys no matter how competent they are.
The media also wants to fan controversy and wants to ‘go for the jugular’ always trying to destroy the ‘leader’ although funnily enough when they had actually achieved their aim in the famous ‘brain-fade’ interview with Natalie Bennett (the Green leader ) they immediately appeared to regret it and the Greens and, she in particular, got an easy run for the rest of the election – of course she used to be a reporter herself so it might be a case of protecting one’s own – I don’t think it was just because she was a woman although that may have played a part too.
The problem with this approach is that the interviewee (in our case usually Nigel in the GE) had to spend most of each interview batting the usual slurs and innuendoes away into the long grass and was seldom asked any positive questions or to expand on or detail any of UKIP’s policies.
This sort of tactic is likely to be repeated during the referendum campaign unless there is a general public rejection of that style of journalism. We must all complain vociferously whenever it is used and demand to be given positive information on the pros and cons of leaving EU not just negative ‘off the wall’ allegations that the ‘Out’ camp is split / racist etc
On another point – I am surprised at Redwood’s attitude – he does know where the national interest lies. However we should never under-estimate the impact of personal ambition. I suspect that someone has whispered in his ear that when Cameron resigns…… but only if he keeps below the radar!
If Philip Hammond and John Redwood are the best that the EUsceptic Tories can offer, it will certainly be up to UKIP to lead the way. At least we know what we want and are determined to get it instead of running hither and thither like limp-wristed ninnies in a thunderstorm.
I’m disgusted with anyone who’s been ‘turned’ by their colleagues for personal and financial gain; they’re actually worse than the naive fools who believe in the EU as a ‘good thing’.
Chap called Baker on Sunday Politics, “organiser”? of the bolshy 50 reported in the DT said they are waiting for the “appointed” organiser for the outs to be named.From his comments re UKIP, it doesn`t look as though Nigel will get the nod.
We, as a society, seem to be very obsessed with having a ‘leader’ for everything.
It must be about time that we all worked as a team with a common goal – to get this country out of this appalling Union.
There are millions of people with this aim in all walks of life, supporters of all political parties (except perhaps the LibDems?) and I think it would be much better to have a team leading this bid for ‘freedom’. A team with representatives from all political persuasions, from businesses and from campaign groups. I suppose it will become inevitable that some will demand a single spokesman, but why not have a number of these, speaking for us ‘Yes to Europe,No to EU’ supporters? We could have someone speaking for Sovereignty, someone on Finance, Democracy, Law, etc. Hearing experts in specialized fields is what is needed, not a ‘Leader’. This is an extremely serious campaign and expertise is vital.
I don’t think it really matters what the country votes for the bottom line is the EU wants us to stay Cameron wants us to stay big business wants us to stay. Guess what? We are going to stay
Even if you correct, the EU is a failed political project. It is only a matter of time before something has to give.
Looking all over Europe there is crumbling support and consequently,a rise in support for anti-EU parties. There is no European demos and never will be. The euro cannot actually be called a success and in the next two (or one )years before the referendum, I think we can expect to see a serious rift forming.
Two years in politics is a very long time.