Reader mail continues to pour in on George Osborne’s forecast that Brexit would cost each UK household £4,300 by 2030. One obvious criticism: how can you claim, on the one hand, that we shouldn’t leave because a post-EU future poses unknown risks and then claim, on the other hand, the risk is exactly £4,300 per household in 16 years?
It’s a massive inconsistency. The first claim is that we shouldn’t change anything because we don’t know what will happen and it will probably be worse. The second claim is that we shouldn’t change anything because we know exactly what will happen and it will be precisely and quantifiably worse.
Who knows?
The common thread to both claims – and the only bit of verifiable truth in either of them – is that no one knows what’s going to happen. But we do know this: personal liberty and prosperity emerge when you have small government, low taxes, simple rules applied fairly to everyone, the rule of law and sound money.
Further, we know the European Union continues to be driven in a direction directly opposed to almost all the elements you need if you want personal liberty and prosperity. In that sense, it’s foolish to engage in a debate about outcomes no one can possible predict. It’s a waste of time and tactical misdirection.
The real debate is one over first principles. Britain can show leadership in Europe by standing on principle and leading by example. What point is there having influence in an organisation that is philosophically committed to undermining all the principles that have accounted for Britain’s remarkable success in the last 300 years?
Category: Brexit