Quentin's EU Blog

Motivations of some of the commentators

Quentin Skinner -

Motivation of Inners and Outers

Certainly, there will be many who have held long term convictions for or against remaining in the EU. Such convictions will often have been motivated by those individuals' or corporations' sphere of activity, in a perfectly reasonable way. Any business based entirely on exporting goods to EU countries will of course be against Brexit. Others, who trade entirely within the UK, will resent the needless bureaucratic interference flowing from Brussels. Many people will have held intuitive beliefs, one way or another, without having been influenced by the arguments of those who may have quietly vested interests.

The Outers' position

It seems to me that people who are for Brexit can only be influenced by the intellectual argument that the balance of probability - across such a wide range of issues - will lead to a better outcome for the UK as a whole. I don't really see any significant circumstances how they can be motivated by anything - overtly or covertly - other than this.... Unless, perhaps where hedge fund managers have taken a position from which they will benefit materially on Brexit.

I believe that those pressing for an Out vote must be arguing on principle, as they certainly are doing so - and, so far, doing reasonably well, as far as the latest polls indicate - in the face of the massive power of the Establishment, both British, European and overseas, and in spite of the pressure and incentive that the Establishment can bring to bear.

The Power of the Establishment

Contrast this with the position of the In Group. How much easier to argue for for the status quo, even when you know that such will not exist. How much easier when the huge forces of the establishment are at hand to incentivise you to stay in their camp. How much easier when one can swamp people with a tide of conjecture from the Establishment, much of it presented as fact.

At every stage of the campaign thus far, the In group have been at pains to threaten Armageddon should we leave. Whilst almost every In statement has been prefaced with comments to the effect that of course the EU has many deep problems but, should we leave, we face disaster at every turn. How negative?

If David Cameron holds this belief, how on earth can he have said what he said in his Bloomberg Speech - that of course Britain would flourish outside the EU - and how irresponsible would he have been in calling for the referendum whilst feeling that such calamity would obviously ensue if the vote was Out?

How might the Establishment influence 'In' messages?

From the moment the campaign got going in earnest, there has been a constant stream of messages by supposedly independent experts in their field, rolling out Project Fear. These have included such things as:

  1. An In letter from a number of ex Heads of Staff of the Armed Forces
  2. An In letter from several scientists
  3. An In letter signed by heads of 36 of the FTSE100 companies
  4. In comments from senior civil servants, despite the fact that they are required to remain politically impartial
  5. In comments from the Governor of the Bank of England, despite the fact that the Bank has pledged to remain neutral
  6. In comments from the head of the CBI, despite the fact the the CBI has pledged to remain neutral
  7. In comments by various Senior figures in the NHS
  8. Most recently, David Cameron has now encouraged many (although not all) British Unions to stand behind the In campaign

In addition, various outside countries and concerns have been part of the concerted In campaign, that to my mind can only be described as blatant propoganda:

  1. Obama's State Visit, impeccably timed, allowed him to try to bully the British electorate to remain in the EU. It is in the interests of the USA to see Britain remaining in the EU, in order to maximise the benefits to the US that will flow from the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, (TTIP) that will allow US multinationals to sell into the EU in a fashion that gives them much more power against EU Govenements. That Obama used English rather than American words, and described the EU as being the architect of post-war European peace rather than NATO, would suggest that this speech was written by No.10 Downing Street. Indeed, I think that much of it was regurgitated for the recent visit by the Japanese Prime Minister.
  2. Countless European Heads of State, as well as the a Euro-elite, talk of how disastrous it would be for the UK to leave. Of course, but one might have thought that they could have given us a better deal to entice us to remain.
  3. The OECD and the IMF have also spoken gravely about the consequences of Brexit, but these organisations are inextricably tied up with the EU establishment.

What might be motivating such opposition to Brexit?

Well, rather than addressing all of the above points in detail, I would make the following points:

  1. There is no doubt that the Government is twisting every arm it can to try to get its way

  2. The Civil Service is supposedly meant to remain apolitical, and yet it appears clear to me that this Government is shamelessly using the Civil servants to further its political intent. They plainly wrote many of these letters, including that from the ex Heads of Armed Forces - one signatory, a General, said afterwards that he had never even seen the letter, let to alone agreed to sign it.

  3. The letter from the FTSE100 bosses was certainly drafted by Downing Street - it would be fanciful to think that so many busy high-fliers would have put aside the time to do this independently, let alone agree on whose draft to go with. It is interesting that only one third of the FTSE100 companies signed this letter. It is also interesting to learn that (according to research by Daniel Hannan MEP) these 36 FTSE100 companies have spent €21.3 million lobbying the EU, and have received back €120.9 million in grants.

How else might the Establishment garner such support?

1.The Establishment has a huge arsenal of influence to try to get its way, in the same way that House of Commons Whips can pressurise MPs into following the party line. Just imagine the promises of comfortable positions on Quangos, lucrative Government contracts, the odd honour or two, a well-paid position somewhere in the Brussels machine, funding for certain scientific research.... One could go on.... You may say that I am being cynical, but I myself have seen this type of thing in my business experience. Imagine how this will certainly happen in the echelons of big UK business, of Westmister politics, of EU politics and indeed of global businesses. It would be naive to think that these hidden influences are not rampant just underneath the surface.

2.One thing that is striking in the campaign thus far is the apparent absence of any overt official EU propoganda for In. If one thinks about it, it would have been an obvious realisation for them to see that massive overt EU funding to buy the In vote would most probably backfire.

However, given the importance of avoiding Brexit, and the way the EU elite have been seen to do business, it is inconceivable that very large sums are not being spent by the EU to support the In Campaign. The IMF is headed by a French former head of the EU elite, and doubtless the EU have a huge influence in the OECD. Of course such organisations naturally may prefer a smooth sea, rather than waves caused by Brexit, and will look at any argument for In. However, many of these arguments will be looking at the overall balance of the EU and others, rather than what is specifically in the interests of the UK. And, of course, there may well be huge EU influence behind the scenes to get such pronouncements.

3.We now see David Cameron on stage with British Union leaders, who have been persuaded to support him for the In campaign. These are people who have clearly hated the Prime Minister, especially after last year's Tory proposals to further eviscerate Union powers. However, it now seems that the Government has reversed its proposals in a blatant effort to buy support for the In campaign from the unions.

Conclusion

Goodness only knows what political and/or financial horse-trading is going on behind the scenes in order to keep Britain in the EU. One thing is for certain, though, that a huge amount of this will be going on, or otherwise the politicians will not be doing their job!

It doesn't bear thinking about...

Moment to reflect

Why not reflect on all of this in some soothing contemplation, by clicking the arrow to play, maximise the screen, consider the full range of means with which the Establishment can manipulate things, and press 'Done' at the end?