Enthusiast
Established Member
- Joined
- 18 Mar 2019
- Messages
- 1,223
I suppose it depends on who you believed. Did you believe the Prime Minister, or did you believe other people who had different reasons for asking you to vote the way they'd like you to? There were plenty of predictions from both sides, a large number of which failed to materialise. It made no difference to me as I took notice of nobody as I'd decided more than twenty years earlier which way I would vote if ever given the chance. In fact I don't know who the last two on your list are. I work on the assumption that all politicians tell lies, or at he very least do not tell the whole truth and I rarely, if ever rely on their musings. However, for those who do not share my cynicism there is no doubt that the "official" information provided to all households (which encouraged people to vote remain) made it quite clear what a vote to leave would mean as far as the Single Market and FoM went. Anybody who listened to spivs and chancers (and most politicians) ran the risk of being misled.Or, they believed what they were being told.
“Absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the Single Market” - Daniel Hannan
“Wouldn't it be terrible if we were really like Norway and Switzerland? Really? They're rich. They're happy. They're self-governing” - Nigel Farage
“The Norwegian option, the EEA option, I think that it might be initally attractive for some business people” - Matthew Elliot (Vote Leave chief executive)
“Increasingly, the Norway option looks the best for the UK” - Arron Banks (Leave.EU founder)
All of the above were pre-referendum.
Both sides ran their own version of "Project Fear". George Osborne told me that "A vote to leave would represent an immediate and profound shock to our economy. That shock would push our economy into a recession”. I didn't. But I don't hold it against him because I don't believe what politicians (of any persuasion) tell me. It's my job to sort out the wheat from the chaff.They did make it well known. But then Leave campaign replied that it was all part of "Project Fear".
When I voted to leave, my definition of leaving was to withdraw entirely from the EU and all its institutions. Everybody who voted to leave had different reasons for doing so but it was optimistic in the extreme expecting the UK to retain any of the major benefits of EU membership if we left. Frankly, people who voted to leave with that expectation have only themselves to blame if they are now disappointed.
When I made my decision that I would vote to leave FoM was not a particular issue. There were only twelve members and the numbers from them settling in the UK were not particularly unmanageable. That all changed in 2004 with the eastern expansion. It was plainly obvious that people in countries where average incomes were as low as 10-20% of those in the West, would up sticks and that there would be mass migration from the East to the West. This was exacerbated in 2007 with the accession of Romania and Bulgaria. It may seem all fine and dandy that UK citizens could work, study and settle in any one of 27 European countries of their choice. However, it is plainly ridiculous that upwards of half a billion people had the absolute unfettered right (bar in the most exceptional circumstances) to settle in the UK. The decision I took in 1992 was never likely to change and it was not particularly influenced by FoM at that time. However, had I reconsidered in 2016, FoM most certainly would have been a major factor in my decision.