EU conspiracy theory - forced to stay?

My letter to the Newmarket News, March 2016:

There's a lot of misinformation flying around in relation to the EU debate. Diana Donald (Mar 23) writes "It transpires that we may only leave if all EU countries ratify our exit", going on to say that this proves how undemocratic the "United States of Europe" is. In truth, the procedure for leaving is clearly set out in article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty. If a country gives notice that it wishes to leave, negotiations will begin on a withdrawal agreement – that country will then cease to be a member either when the withdrawal agreement has been reached, or after two years if no agreement can be reached.

EU & Boris Johnson

My letter to the Newmarket News, May 2016. I know the bit about glass houses doesn't quite make sense but I couldn't resist getting it in regardless:

Just a few months ago, Boris Johnson wrote “It is also true that the single market is of considerable value to many UK companies and consumers, and that leaving would cause at least some business uncertainty, while embroiling the Government for several years in a fiddly process of negotiating new arrangements, so diverting energy from the real problems of this country – low skills, low social mobility, low investment etc – that have nothing to do with Europe". He also wrote “In favour of staying, it is in Britain’s geo-strategic interests to be pretty intimately engaged in the doings of a continent that has a grim 20th-century history, and whose agonies have caused millions of Britons to lose their lives". Two years ago he wrote "the European Community, now Union, has helped to deliver a period of peace and prosperity for its people as long as any since the days of the Antonine emperor" - yet the other day he described the same argument, made by the Prime Minister, as "wholly bogus", and implied that Cameron was suggesting World War 3 would break out if we exited – a ludicrous caricature of what the PM actually said. Boris – when it comes to ludicrous caricatures, people in glass houses…

Are Remain & Leave equally misleading?

My letter to the Newmarket News, May 2016:

There are many aspects of the EU debate which are shrouded in confusion. For example, the Remain campaign has been criticised for saying that the average household could be £4300 worse off under Brexit, but that figure actually applies to GDP per household which is not the same thing. It should also be noted that this strangely precise figure is the midpoint of a range of estimates – the real effects could be better or worse. Rather than try to explain the details behind this figure, the Remain campaign have repeatedly pushed the dumbed-down version of it, damaging their credibility. However, this pales in comparison to the Leave campaign’s greatest distortion – the claim that we send £350m to the EU per week, and that this money could be spent differently after Brexit. Even if we ignore the money the EU spends in the UK, this figure ignores the rebate (£5bn per year), which is deducted before the UK’s contribution is sent – in other words, the rebate never leaves the country, and therefore would not be extra money available to spend in the event of Brexit, rendering the £350m figure completely and unambiguously wrong.