LETTER: Objective analysis of EU membership

What's on.
What's on.

Following recent correspondence in your letters pages, it is worth reflecting on why CBI members wish us to remain in the EU and whether that would be in the best interests of the majority.

First we need to eliminate from any survey of companies, career civil servants and Brussels officials who happen (in retirement) to have picked up UK directorships.

Then, since CBI members probably have more lobbying power in Brussels than smaller companies, which carry a heavier burden from EU regulations, it would be appropriate to include the views of SMEs that employ over 24 million people in the UK.

Next we should factor in CBI members’ ability to avoid tax (eg by having an HQ in Dublin or Malta) worth about £120 billion pa to them according to the Sunday Telegraph and then ask the rest of voters if they are happy to make up the difference through their tax bills.

Yes there may be benefits in being in the EU, but they need to be offset against the missing tax revenues and other costs, including compliance with EU directives and regulations, which have themselves been estimated at well over £100 billion pa.

It is not long since the CBI and Nissan lobbied for us to join the Euro, but they were wrong then and they are wrong now.

So, let those that are supposed to run the country provide the long awaited objective benefit analysis, as the Swiss did before deciding not to join the EU.

The British people have been denied similar information and a say in their own future for too long, whilst the Government seems content to be led by the nose, by vested interests.

Why should voters acquiesce in the increasing redundancy of Parliament, if there is no tangible benefit?

That information should be demanded with increasing volume, on the run up to the European Elections, whilst those that have repeatedly failed to provide the information, should be ejected from power.


(UKIP) Horsham district councillor for Chanctonbury ward, North Street, Horsham