The EU
referendum debate has been relentless but largely inconclusive. There have even
been debates about who should be allowed to take part in the debate, one fact which
we can probably all draw our own conclusions about.
While the
official campaign seems to have been raging for months, on 20th
March I published an interview with Yorkshire & Humber MEP and in
supporter, Richard Corbett.
I have been trying since to find somebody
willing or able to articulate the argument for leaving the European Union. Matt,
a freelance journalist and politics student took up the chalice.
I asked him exactly
the same set of questions; I started with the issue of sovereignty, with many
claiming that 75% of our laws are passed by in Brussels. Matt conceded that 75%
was ambitious but said that the true figure was nearer to 65%(according to
business for Britain), depending on whether you are discussing laws impacted by
or written by Europe. He admitted the latter figure would be considerably
lower. The figure according to Mr Corbett was 13.2%.
Next I asked
Matt if the EU was nothing more than an expensive Gentleman’s club, costing the
UK taxpayer a fortune. Again, he admitted that the spinning that can be done here is spectacular. He claims that last
year we paid £18billion, minus £5 billion that we immediately received back in
a rebate. He says the EU then spent a further £4billion here on projects,
giving a total cost of £9billion, which he says is still an awful lot. Mr
Corbett disputed this, saying that EU membership is worth £3000 per family in
Britain.Some economists are predicting 2 years of uncertainty in the stock markets leading to a potential crash in the event of a Brexit but Matt thinks there will be some sort of crash whether we leave or not. He told me that the uncertainty depends on whether Cameron resigns or not (in the event of an out vote), adding that formalising Brexit will take a while anyway so the uncertainty and crash are inevitable.
Will Brexit mean
British football club’s expulsion from the Champion’s League, I asked. Matt
thinks that this is ridiculous myth, created by the in campaign. He says that
none of the major clubs or any player has corroborated this.
I asked him
next if Boris Johnson’s decision to back the out campaign was merely a bid for
the Tory leadership. Despite his intention to vote out, he agrees that “Boris
is just looking after Boris, not the people of this country”.
When asked
if both big and small businesses alike will suffer if we vote to leave he is
uncertain, “as there are leaders of business backing both Remain and leave
campaigns”. Both sides he says are being extremely hyperbolic. He has no qualms
though about the fact that EU will still be more than happy to do business with
us though, because we are the sixth biggest economy in the world.
I asked the freelancer,
who has featured in the Independent, if the main intention of the Tory out
campaigners was to abolish worker’s rights. “The intentions of the right wing
Conservative Party are rarely good” he said. ”but that is absolutely no
argument to vote to remain. I’m a socialist – and believe in full employment rights
and social justice for all, but if your main argument to vote to remain is to
oppose the will of the British electorate because you don’t like what they’ve
decided then -it sets a really horrible precedent- that is no reason to prop up
an undemocratic institution just because you lost an argument. Instead, they
should focus on winning the arguments and winning hearts and minds over for
additional employment rights and human rights at the national level.
So can we have an open
and honest fact based debate on the referendum? The Nottingham University politics
student, hopes so, but the moment he said, “it doesn’t look like it. Both of
the designated campaigns are being fronted by vacuous political operators who
make a living deceiving the public. Hopefully, this will change soon” he
dreams.