Brexit. Why do Brits want Out of the EU?

Two out of three Europeans think EU membership is a good thing – Eurobarometer


The latest Eurobarometer survey, measuring public attitudes to the EU across member states, highlights that more people than ever consider their country’s membership of the European Union to be a good thing (62%). This is the highest figure recorded in the last 25 years. 68% are also of the view that their country has benefitted from EU membership – the highest figure since 1983. The latest Eurobarometer figures also show a growing sense of satisfaction amongst Europeans in the democratic functioning of the EU (49%), representing a three point increase since the previous survey in April, whilst 48% feel that their voice counts in the EU, though this latter sentiment appears to be on the decline in a number of countries.

According to a press release issued on the subject, nearly all results measuring support for the EU showed a significant upturn following the UK referendum in 2016, suggesting growing concern across the continent at the impact that Brexit will have and a growing awareness, due to the difficult negotiations, of the benefits of being a member of the EU. 66% of European respondents would vote for their country to remain a member of the EU (a majority in all member states, including the UK) and only 17% would contemplate leaving, with 17% undecided.

Nearly half of the British public still believe the false claim from the Brexit referendum that the UK sends £350 million a week to the EU, despite persistent attempts to debunk the myth.

A new study by King’s College London of attitudes to Brexit found that 42 per cent of people who had heard of the claim still believe it is true, while just 36 per cent thought it was false, with 22 per cent unsure.

The research, conducted with the help of pollster Ipsos MORI, shows that sustained criticism of the false claim by the UK Statistics Authority and others has had little effect, with perceptions mostly unchanged since before the referendum.

The sustained belief also comes despite the Government having shown no sign of spending to supposed £350million extra a week on the NHS, as the advertisements controversially suggested.

The official Vote Leave campaign put the claim on the side of a big red bus and ran it in targeted internet adverts aimed at swing voters, turning the Brexit vote into a referendum on austerity.

The former boss of the Vote Leave campaign Dominic Cummings admitted after the referendum that “all our research and the close result strongly suggests” that Remain would have won without the advert.
[...]
Professor Bobby Duff, the director of the King's College London policy institute, which carried out the research, told The Independent:

“These misperceptions raise important questions about the basis of our decision-making – but as I point out in our work on misperceptions, it’s not as simple as people just changing their minds if they had the correct facts – it’s more emotional than that.

“But it’s a very clear sign of how difficult it will be to bring the country together - the fact that different groups see the same realities so differently shows how divided we are.”

The comprehensive research also catalogues a number of other misconceptions about Brexit, particularly around immigration.

A recent report by the Migration Advisory Committee concluded that EU migrants contribute £4.7 billion more in taxes than they use in welfare benefits and services – but the KCL study found that only 29 per cent of the public correctly believed this, dropping to 16 per cent of Leave voters.

39 per cent of the public and 53 per cent of Leave supporters believe that European immigration has decreased the quality of healthcare in the UK, despite evidence from the official report showing this was not the case, and that a shortage of EU healthcare workers is actually increasing challenges for the NHS.

On the £350 million a week claim, Conservative voters and Leave voters were particularly susceptible to the misinformation: with 54 per cent and 61 per cent of each buying the claim. Just 33 per cent of Labour voters, 22 per cent of Lib Dem voters, and 23 per cent of Remain voters thought it was true.

A near third (32 per cent) of Conservative Remain voters also thought the message, which was mostly fronted by Tory politicians like Boris Johnson, was correct. 67 per cent of all voters had heard of the claim.

"We did get things wrong." George Osborne has admitted having "regrets" about his time in office, saying government mistakes led to Brexit. The former Tory chancellor told the BBC's Newsnight they had made immigration policy errors which "opened up the door in the referendum".

Mr Osborne, who served between 2010 and 2016 under David Cameron, also said Remain supporters had explained the benefits of EU membership "too late". "We were wrong to play into the debate that everything that Brussels did was a challenge and a battle and was wrong," said Mr Osborne, who now edits the London Evening Standard newspaper.

And what about comments attributed to him that he would not rest until Theresa May was "chopped up in bags" in his freezer? "I certainly have said things in private which you know, I probably shouldn't have, and actually, apologised for it."

Theresa May is reported to have struck a “tentative deal” with Brussels that would give the UK’s financial services sector continued access to European markets after Brexit.

The pound jumped after claims that the two sides were close to an agreement that would give UK companies access to European markets as long as British financial regulation remained broadly aligned to that of the EU.

One British official said that negotiators were “making progress”; however, other government sources played down reports that a deal was close, pointing out the priority for negotiators was reaching agreement on the withdrawal.

No 10 insiders suggested that it was “very, very premature” to be talking about the future trading relationship but did not rule out that the future of financial services was being discussed. Others dismissed reports in the Times and on the financial wires as “unsubstantiated rumours”.

In addition to the withdrawal agreement, both sides are also looking for a deal on a high-level declaration of intent which will form the basis for a political statement on the future partnership to be voted on by MPs. The legal and technical details will be hammered out after Britain leaves the EU in March.

With just five months left to secure a deal before Britain’s departure, anxious business leaders are demanding more certainty over the kind of trade terms the divorce will deliver.

Many global banks have reorganised UK operations ahead of Brexit, setting up new European hubs and beginning to move staff and operations to ensure they can continue to serve continental clients if the UK leaves without a deal.

Brussels has ruled out maintaining the existing “passporting” regime but indicated that the EU would accept that the UK has “equivalent” regulations to the EU, and UK financial services companies will be allowed to operate as they now do in Europe.

EU officials have said the bloc’s financial market access system, known as “equivalence”, under which Brussels grants access to foreign banks and insurers if their rules converge with its own, is probably Britain’s best bet.

The UK’s Financial Conduct Authority wants Britain to stay closely aligned with the EU, but without Britain having to copy all the bloc’s rules, the FCA’s acting director of strategy, Richard Monks, has said.

The prime minister’s chief Europe adviser, Oliver Robbins, is continuing negotiations in Brussels and Downing Street sources have indicated in private they hope the Brexit talks will be concluded in November.

However, the two sides are yet to agree on the appropriate backstop to ensure a free-flowing land border in Ireland if no free trade deal can be concluded by the time the transition period ends in December 2020.

The National Crime Agency has launched an investigation into Arron Banks and other people and groups linked to the leave campaign over suspected criminal offences in the Brexit referendum, it has announced.

It came after the Electoral Commission said it had referred the cases to the NCA over suspicions that a “number of criminal offences may have been committed”, and that there were reasonable grounds to suspect that Banks, the insurance millionaire who backed the unofficial leave campaign, was not the “true source” of £8m in loans to it.

An Electoral Commission statement said its investigation focused on £2m reported to have been lent to Better for the Country, a company he used to finance the Leave.EU campaign, and £6m more reportedly given to the organisation, on behalf of Leave.EU, by Banks.

Of this money, £2.9m was used to fund referendum spending on behalf of Leave.EU.

The Electoral Commission statement said: “Due to multiple suspected offences, some of which fall outside the commission’s remit, the commission has referred this matter and handed its evidence to the National Crime Agency.”

The NCA confirmed it had begun an investigation connected to “suspected electoral law offences covered by that referral, as well as any associated offences”.

It said in a statement: “While electoral law offences would not routinely fall within the NCA’s remit, the nature of the necessary inquiries and the potential for offences to have been committed other than under electoral law lead us to consider an NCA investigation appropriate in this instance.”

Banks, formerly a major bankroller of Ukip, has denied any wrongdoing. Andy Wigmore, a spokesperson for Leave.EU, said: “It’s completely to be expected. It will finally bring a head to all these crazy allegations made about us. We’re not worried.”

... ... ...

More than 70 business leaders have signed a letter to the Sunday Times calling for a public vote on the UK's Brexit deal.

The chief executive of Waterstones and former Sainsbury's boss Justin King are among those saying a "destructive hard Brexit" will damage the UK economy.

A group called Business for a People's Vote will launch on Thursday.

A Downing Street source told the BBC the Prime Minister was clear that there would be no new referendum.

The letter was coordinated by The People's Vote campaign, which wants a ballot on whether to accept the terms of the UK's departure from the European Union.

Richard Reed, the co-founder of Innocent Drinks, Lord Myners, the former chairman of Marks and Spencer and Martha Lane Fox, the founder of Lastminute.com, also signed the letter.

...a "destructive hard Brexit" will damage the UK economy.

Ireland has made clear it will "never accept" a Brexit deal that allows the UK to unilaterally end a Northern Ireland "backstop".

On his Twitter account, Simon Coveney, the Irish foreign minister, said a "time-limited backstop" to the Irish border that could be ended unilaterally by the UK "would never be agreed to" by the Republic of Ireland or the EU.

It comes following reports that Dominic Raab, the Brexit secretary, privately demanded the right to pull Britain out of the EU's proposed backstop after just three months.

Theresa May called the Irish prime minister on Monday in order to calm anger in Dublin over comments made by her Brexit Secretary Dominic Raab.

Mr Raab reportedly tried to backslide on a commitment the UK had made to prevent a hard border with the Republic, suggesting the 'backstop' policy should expire after just three months.

The Taoiseach's office said the prime minister has "sought" the call on Monday after the comments, said to have been made in a private meeting with officials, emerged.

Leo Varadkar told Ms May he was open to a "review" mechanism for the backstop, which is controversial with eurosceptics, but that this could not amount to "a unilateral decision to end the backstop".

Speaking earlier on monday in Dublin Mr Varadkar said a time-limited backstop would not be worth the paper it was printed on.

“As a government we're working very hard to get an agreement, ideally by the end of the year but you know one thing we can't countenance is any idea that there'd be a three-month limit on the backstop," he told the Irish press.

“You know a backstop with a three-month limit on it or an expiry date of that nature isn't worth the paper it's written on and what the UK government has signed up to is a legally operative backstop that will apply unless and until we have a new agreement to supersede it and I think it's reasonable for us to expect a country like the United Kingdom and a government like the UK government to stand by its commitments.”

A spokesperson for the Taoiseach said: “Both leaders emphasised their commitment to avoiding a hard border and the need for a legally operable backstop.

“The Prime minister raised the possibility of a review mechanism for the backstop. The Taoiseach indicated and openness to consider proposals for a review, provided that it was clear that the outcome of any such review could not involve a unilateral decision to end the backstop.

“He recalled the prior commitments made that the backstop must apply ‘unless and until’ alternative arrangements are agreed.”

A Downing Street spokesperson giving an account of the call provided less detail, telling journalists: “The Prime Minister spoke to the Taoiseach this morning to take stock of the progress being made in the negotiations, including on the Northern Ireland backstop. In a constructive conversation, the Prime Minister and the Taoiseach discussed the remaining issues.

“They agreed that the intention was that the backstop should only be a temporary arrangement and that the best solution to the Northern Ireland border would be found by agreeing a future relationship between the UK and the EU. In order to ensure that the backstop, if ever needed, would be temporary, the Prime Minister said that there would need to be a mechanism through which the backstop could be brought to an end.

“She affirmed the UK’s commitment to the Belfast Good Friday Agreement and to avoiding a hard border between Northern Ireland and Ireland. The Prime Minister and the Taoiseach agreed that discussions should continue.”

I have always admired the British. We owe them afternoon tea, Monty Python and the Beatles. This is more than many nations have achieved in their history. I was also one of the few columnists in Germany who found it ridiculous to be angry at our British neighbours after they decided to leave the European club they had once helped to make great. I felt sorry whenever I saw the British prime minister stumble through a European summit, with her crooked smile and her even more crooked offers. Right now, though, I’m feeling less sympathetic. In fact, I have been catching myself thinking: “Go with God. But go!” Maybe this week could be the week things become clear. But who would bet on it?

The UK is making a spectacular demonstration of how to make a fool of yourself with the entire world looking on. What was once the most powerful empire on Earth can’t even find its way to the door without tripping over its own feet. When Theresa May arrives in Brussels with yet another proposal, you can be sure it won’t be worth the paper it’s written 24 hours later. She either presents ideas that Brussels has long ago rejected, her plans have been rejected by her own party, or Boris Johnson tears them to pieces in his newspaper column.

No deal is better than a bad deal? If you are convinced of this: go ahead. A hard Brexit will cost the rest of us a lot – there’s no question about that – but it is nothing compared to what is awaiting you Britons.

First the trucks will be jammed all the way to Wales, because the borders are back. Then the fuel will run out at filling stations and medicines will run out in pharmacies. And once all the Polish plumbers have gone home, there will be nobody to call when the toilet gets blocked.

So there you are: left in your water-damaged homes, without fuel and aspirins, but with extremely bad-tempered Russians as neighbours. And they will realise they have invested far too much money in the English real estate market and will be incensed because their investments are going down the drain.

When I mocked the Brexit chaos in Der Spiegel recently, I received a lot of mail saying that this wasn’t fair. One line of attack was that only the English had voted to leave the European Union, so it was not a British decision. Second, the government in London wouldn’t speak up for right-thinking people who want to stay close to the EU.

I can only say: sorry, folks, but it doesn’t work to declare the government a kind of foreign power, whose rise can’t really be explained. We Germans have tried to pull this nifty trick a few times ourselves. Unfortunately, in a democracy any government that has come into office not through a coup but through free elections is regarded as an expression of the will of the people. That is why we are talking about representative democracy.
... ... ...