You are here:   Boris Johnson > Debunking the EU Referendum Myths
 
Division also created important distance between what were very distinctive Leave tribes. Take, for example, the reaction to Farage’s controversial “Breaking Point” poster, showing a line of migrants crossing the Croatia-Slovenia border during the height of the migrant crisis of 2015. Had there been a unified Leave operation, Michael Gove and Boris Johnson would not have been able to convincingly express their disapproval of the message. Having two distinct sets of Brexiteers  allowed mainstream politicians to reassure voters that voting Leave was not an endorsement of xenophobic politics. All the while, Farage’s more full-throated case for Leave was heard by those who wanted to listen.

Finally, consider an alternative scenario in which every corner of the Leave movement came together under one umbrella. Is it likely that a campaign as ideologically diverse and involving as many egos would have had the agility and ruthlessness needed to fight an effective national campaign?

Myth No. 4: Vote Leave should not have painted £350 million on the side of their bus

Emblazoned on the side of the Vote Leave battle bus, taking Boris Johnson and Vote Leave chair and Labour MP Gisela Stuart, around the country, was the slogan, “We send the EU £350 million. Let’s fund our NHS instead.” The claim also played a starring role in Vote Leave leaflets and broadcasts. It was the single most repeated — and controversial — assertion made by the campaign. 

The figure of £350 million was derived by taking the UK’s gross contribution to the EU in 2014 — £18,777 million — and dividing it by 52, giving £361 million, which was then rounded down for neatness. The figure takes no account of the £4.4 billion rebate negotiated by Margaret Thatcher and in place since 1985, which is deducted at source (i.e. never sent to Brussels). In 2014 there was also nearly £4.5 billion the UK received back in various EU grants, the vast bulk for agricultural support and regional development aid, much of which will continue — paid for by British taxpayers — after the UK leaves. The figure of £350 million is, at best, debatable. What cannot be argued with is that there will not be £350 million which can simply be given to the NHS on leaving the EU.

The use of the figure was extremely controversial with many Vote Leave supporters. It prompted Ruth Lea, a leading pro-Brexit economist, to resign and campaign for Brexit independently. Farage believes it was a big mistake — perhaps not surprising because of his rivalry with the official campaign — but so did politicians who took part in Vote Leave’s regular Thursday campaign meeting. When asked about the figure, one senior politician replied: “Well, I never went on the bus. Draw your own conclusions.” Another at the very top of the campaign said: “I can still put together an argument to justify its use.” Hardly a ringing endorsement.

We have spoken to most of Vote Leave’s largest donors. Only one of them was happy with the use of the £350 million figure. Many felt it was dishonest and reduced their noble cause to the same level as the Remain camp’s Project Fear. The message of giving the money to the NHS also did not sit well with donors who believed in reducing the size of the state and reforming public services.

View Full Article
 
Share/Save
 
 
 
 
Lawrence JamesAnonymousL
August 29th, 2016
10:08 AM
Why no reference to the tales of the swarms of libidinous, scimitar brandishing Turks poised to sweep towards Britain ? Perhaps the Bashi-Bazouks were deterred by the rumour of the European army mustering and, in some versions, ready to crush anti-Eu dissidents here and on the continent. Uhlans did not appear in Upminster, but the possibility added to the rumours.

Alan Cochrane
August 26th, 2016
12:08 PM
In this otherwise illuminating debunking of what they call the EU referendum myths, I am very much afraid that their conclusion that Project Fear didn’t work in the Scottish referendum and so shouldn’t have been tried in the EU version, shows that Michael Mosbacher and Oliver Wiseman have misread the lessons from north of the border. The plain fact is that the rubbishing of the nationalists’ economic plans, which given the subsequent collapse in the oil price and the concomitant £15 billion ‘black hole’ in the Scottish economy now looks extremely mild. The over optimistic miscalculation of Scotland’s future was reckless in the extreme and could not have been left unchallenged by the No camp. The fact that it was stupidly dubbed ‘Project Fear’ by an apparatchik in the Unionist camp detracts from its efficacy only in respect of the bad press it subsequently attracted. Complaints about it stemmed both from émigré Scots in London who wanted more passion – and in one case more music – in the anti-Nat battle and from English Tory politicians who didn’t understand what was going on in Scotland but thought they knew better anyway. But the plain fact is that the constant attacks on the nationalists’ pie-in-the-sky, back of a fag packet projections, orchestrated in the main by Alistair, now Lord, Darling, worked and worked extremely well. The nationalists’ main gripe as regards the entire operation mounted against them appears to centre on the fact that Darling, Chancellor Osborne and Governor Carney, as well as the leaders and finance spokesmen for all the Unionist parties said in words of one syllable that an independent Scotland could not retain the pound. ‘But it’s as much Scotland’s pound as anyone else’s’ complained Alex Salmond, ‘ so why can’t we use it?’ Unfortunately for his cause, the political leaders in Wales and Northern Ireland, whose peoples also share sterling, were stern in their lack of support for their fellow Celt. Thus was this and every claim of the Nats – Project Fib as some came to call their promises of an economic nirvana – ruthlessly denounced and dismissed, yet Mosbacher and Wiseman suggest that Project Fear was actually responsible for increasing the pro-independence as the campaign progressed. It is true that the opinion polls narrowed but Darling, for one, always insisted that the final result would be closer than the early opinion polls suggested. If we are looking for myths to debunk, may I suggest that the biggest of all in relation to the Scottish referendum is that the result hinged on the extra powers promised for the Scottish Parliament by all the Unionist politicians. This massive extension of Holyrood’s responsibilities, rushed through in what can only be described as hopelessly indecent haste, by Lord Smith’s Commission was a panic measure, pure and simple. And a panic measure that wasn’t needed. Opinion poll evidence suggests pretty conclusively that it was Alex Salmond’s lack of a credible economic policy that did for him, not promises of extra powers: or in other words - It was Project Fear wot won it. Still, I digress. Living in Scotland and voting for Remain, like the bulk of my compatriots, my knowledge of the how Brexit won in England is sketchy. However, whilst the Brexiteers shamelessly tried to terrify the horses with their ludicrous ‘£350 million for the NHS’ claim, I think Mosbacher and Wiseman got it right when they said that by keeping shtum about their economic plans the Leavers didn’t allow the kind of detailed examination to which Project Fear subjected poor old Alex Salmond’s. Why the Remain camp did not concentrate on exposing that glaring omission in the Brexit case is something only its leaders can explain. Alan Cochrane Edinburgh

Post your comment

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.