BRIEFINGS
EU REFERENDUM
OUR AIM IS CLEAR
It is to reverse the 1975 referendum decision which Enoch Powell prophetically stated was “no more than provisional”. Margaret Thatcher, in her book Statecraft, puts it clearly,
“That such an unnecessary and irrational project as building a European super-state was ever embarked on will be seen in future years to be perhaps the greatest folly of the modern era. And that Britain ... should ever have become part of it will appear a political error of historic magnitude.”
The 1975 referendum results gave a blank cheque to British politicians who entangled the UK in one integration treaty after another. This must be reversed.
The coming referendum is an opportunity to correct this political error. The error was to entangle a democratic state in partial government by a supranational organization, a unique political aberration.
The Referendum Planning Group [RPG] has a clear aim and a clear plan. The referendum will be whether to stay in or leave the EU. It is not about whether or not any reforms achieved by David Cameron are acceptable because he will not be negotiating the existence of EU membership but only some minor details of the current membership.
Voting ‘yes’ does not preserve the status quo. The status quo is not on offer. As Jacques Delors said in 2012:
“If the British cannot support the trend to more integration in Europe, we can remain friends but on a different basis. I could imagine a form such as an European Economic Area or a Free Trade Agreement.”
Because that is the real choice, Michael Portillo said that, while he could just about live with the current EU, a vote by Britain to stay in, would unleash “more integration in Europe” and therefore he would vote to leave.
However, we recognize that many businesses and the electorate are concerned about trade, jobs and investment. Many business leaders make speeches which are reported as being in favour of the EU but, on examination, are in favour of being in the Single Market. It is perfectly possible to be in the Single Market and not in the EU, as Norway and Iceland are.
We regard it as essential to reassure business and the electorate that Britain would retain its position in the European Economic Area and rejoin EFTA, and thus stay in the Single Market.
Business would, therefore, be unaffected. There need be no debate about the effects on business because there would be no effects.
The Norway/Iceland position is in existence, is off-the-shelf and a proven Market Solution. Further trade arrangements would be made by the UK as a democratic self-governing state, having regained its position in the WTO. They do not need to be discussed now. More detail about the plan of the RPG is in the attached Briefing and the full exit plan, entitled FLEXCIT, can be read on the website.
It is essential to emphasise we will remain ‘friends’, as Jacques Delors said.
At present no other group has formed to take on this role. Some others are waiting to see what David Cameron brings back in his negotiations in Brussels but, as stated above, that is not what the referendum question is about. To wait is also not to prepare.
It is to reverse the 1975 referendum decision which Enoch Powell prophetically stated was “no more than provisional”. Margaret Thatcher, in her book Statecraft, puts it clearly,
“That such an unnecessary and irrational project as building a European super-state was ever embarked on will be seen in future years to be perhaps the greatest folly of the modern era. And that Britain ... should ever have become part of it will appear a political error of historic magnitude.”
The 1975 referendum results gave a blank cheque to British politicians who entangled the UK in one integration treaty after another. This must be reversed.
The coming referendum is an opportunity to correct this political error. The error was to entangle a democratic state in partial government by a supranational organization, a unique political aberration.
The Referendum Planning Group [RPG] has a clear aim and a clear plan. The referendum will be whether to stay in or leave the EU. It is not about whether or not any reforms achieved by David Cameron are acceptable because he will not be negotiating the existence of EU membership but only some minor details of the current membership.
Voting ‘yes’ does not preserve the status quo. The status quo is not on offer. As Jacques Delors said in 2012:
“If the British cannot support the trend to more integration in Europe, we can remain friends but on a different basis. I could imagine a form such as an European Economic Area or a Free Trade Agreement.”
Because that is the real choice, Michael Portillo said that, while he could just about live with the current EU, a vote by Britain to stay in, would unleash “more integration in Europe” and therefore he would vote to leave.
However, we recognize that many businesses and the electorate are concerned about trade, jobs and investment. Many business leaders make speeches which are reported as being in favour of the EU but, on examination, are in favour of being in the Single Market. It is perfectly possible to be in the Single Market and not in the EU, as Norway and Iceland are.
We regard it as essential to reassure business and the electorate that Britain would retain its position in the European Economic Area and rejoin EFTA, and thus stay in the Single Market.
Business would, therefore, be unaffected. There need be no debate about the effects on business because there would be no effects.
The Norway/Iceland position is in existence, is off-the-shelf and a proven Market Solution. Further trade arrangements would be made by the UK as a democratic self-governing state, having regained its position in the WTO. They do not need to be discussed now. More detail about the plan of the RPG is in the attached Briefing and the full exit plan, entitled FLEXCIT, can be read on the website.
It is essential to emphasise we will remain ‘friends’, as Jacques Delors said.
At present no other group has formed to take on this role. Some others are waiting to see what David Cameron brings back in his negotiations in Brussels but, as stated above, that is not what the referendum question is about. To wait is also not to prepare.