The EU ‘out’ campaigners have two troublesome image problems to contend with: the message of ‘No’ is intrinsically negative and will scare off voters, plus they are looking to change the status quo. Business for Britain, which is expected by many in Westminster to be one of the groups forming the ‘No’ campaign, is attempting to remedy the negativity of a Brexit with its new publication ‘Change or Go’.
In the 1000-page report, BfB outlines in detail the changes British businesses want to the UK’s relationship with the EU. It argues that if these changes can’t be won, then it’s time to leave. The report counters the idea put about by ‘In’ campaigners that Britain would lose out commercially if we left the EU:
‘Far from offering every consumer and business the benefits of a wider domestic market, after 40 years of membership, less than 5 per cent of UK companies directly export to the EU yet all are forced to bear the burden of its regulations … the EU is not a free trade area but a customs union, and one which has spectacularly failed to deliver trade deals with rising economic giants like China.’
Not coincidentally, Business for Britain is masterminded by Matthew Elliott, who ran the No to AV campaign. As you can see from the back page of the document, Elliott and co are attempting to paint the positive side of a Britain’s future outside of the EU. It’s a similar argument to the one made by Daniel Hannan — that Britain’s global trading future will more than make up for any business lost by quitting the EU:
https://twitter.com/matthew_elliott/status/612927539942719488
How each of the campaigns are perceived by the public will be key to their success. Although Business for Britain are bullish in their demands for reform, they are not (yet) planning to support a Brexit at all costs. The report suggests that if Cameron can achieve substantial change and push Europe towards a two-tier model, this would be the best option for British businesses and we should remain ‘In’.
Comments