PROJECT FEAR II
First our leaders tried to scare us out of Brexit. Now it’s Brussels and their puppets who tell us it will be as damaging as the Blitz. But we know how that ended!
Labour minister Gisela Stuart accused the OECD of trying to ‘hijack Brexit’, adding: ‘These EU elites refuse to accept that 17.4million people voted to take back control, and meant it. The British public didn’t believe the OECD’s scaremongering before, and nor should they start now.’
Former Tory minister Shailesh Vara said the OECD report appeared to be part of a bid by embittered Remainers to launch a ‘Project Fear 2’.
Sources close to Mr Gurria said the 67-year- old former finance minister and foreign minister of Mexico, who has run the OECD since 2006, was merely pointing out that this was a ‘ serious moment’ for the UK. ‘He is theatrical at times,’ conceded one.
The think-tank, which was a vocal supporter of Britain remaining in the Brussels club, said it expected economic growth to slow from 1.6 per cent this year to just 1 per cent next year.
It warned that a ‘disorderly Brexit’ following a breakdown of negotiations ‘ would trigger an adverse reaction of financial markets’, sending the pound tumbling and leading to further cuts to Britain’s credit rating.
Warning of a ‘bumpy road’ ahead, Mr Gurria said: ‘The United Kingdom is facing challenging times, with Brexit creating serious economic uncertainties that could stifle growth for years to come.
‘Maintaining the closest economic relationship with the European Union will be absolutely key, for the trade of goods and services as well as the movement of labour.’
But Mr Hammond, who appeared briefly alongside Mr Gurria to introduce him to officials and journalists before leaving, insisted the report ‘represents the OECD’s view, not Her Majesty’s Government’s view’. A Government spokesman added: ‘We are leaving the EU and there will not be a second referen- dum. We are working to achieve the best deal with the EU that protects jobs and the economy.’
The OECD – which before the referendum declared ‘ there is no upside for the UK in Brexit’ – has already been forced to admit that it was too gloomy about the prospects for Brexit Britain. This time last year it forecast growth of just 1 per cent for 2017 – well below its current forecast of 1.6 per cent.
Mr Gurria yesterday said he was ‘delighted’ that his think-tank’s pessimistic forecasts had not been borne out, crediting ‘ good management of the unexpected’ by the Treasury and Bank of England.
And the OECD admitted in its report that Brexit negotiations were difficult to forecast and could ‘ prove more favourable’ than assumed – boosting trade, investment and growth.
But it stressed that this would require ‘ an ambitious EU- UK agreement and a transition period to allow for adjustment to the new agreement’.
Mr Gurria warned that the process was ‘ mind- boggling’ in its complexity.
‘This is undoing 40 years of closer and closer co- operation and you are doing that in a few months,’ he said. ‘After 40 years of integration, it is quite unfair to be asking the UK government to have all the answers.’
John Longworth, the former head of the British Chambers of Commerce and now co- chairman of Leave Means Leave, said: ‘No doubt the vested interests in the OECD would be delighted if we rejoined the EU.
‘Even if this were desirable, it would result in utter disaster for Britain. Instead we should aim for a swift, clean Brexit and seize the opportunities that will make us richer as a nation.’
WITH each passing day, it becomes abundantly clear the bull- headed intransigence of the EU negotiators is a deliberate policy to try to sabotage Brexit.
There is a determination by politicians in Brussels, Paris and even Berlin to make the process of Britain’s departure from the EU so difficult, disruptive and expensive that the British people might think again and demand the opportunity to reverse last year’s referendum decision.
Of course, it is no surprise Brussels panjandrums such as Jean-Claude Juncker and Michel Barnier arrogantly think they can browbeat 17 million Britons to decide that Brexit might not be such a good idea after all.
For they and their unelected predecessors based in the European Commission’s Brussels HQ, where they are served by 33,000 taxpayerfunded bureaucrats, have a successful record in reversing the will of European citizens.
On several occasions, they have persuaded member states to overturn referendums because the results interfered with grand plans to create a European superstate.
For example, the Danish people voted in 1992 against ratifying the Maastricht Treaty, which set out terms for greater European integration. This was the ‘ wrong’ decision in Brussels’ eyes, and so a second vote had to be held after a shabby compromise deal in order to get the ‘right’ result.
Ruthless
The Irish were the next fall guys. In 2008, they rejected the Lisbon Treaty (which created the framework for today’s EU), but were successfully persuaded to think again.
Even the French were bludgeoned into line after they initially rejected the case for a European-wide constitution in a referendum in 2005.
Days later, the Dutch also rebuffed the plan in their own referendum. In panic, Brussels forced France to renegotiate and then adopt the proposal without another vote.
Many furious French voters believed their wishes, which they had made clear in the 2005 vote, had been ignored.
In sum, Brussels won the day by using bullying tactics based on the belief that the people of Europe have no right to obstruct politicians’ dream for a European superstate.
Such ruthless tactics are the Commission’s main weapon.
Indeed, the way it treats dissension was recently evident in Brussels’ response to Spanish police ripping out ballot boxes and beating up pensioners as they tried to stop Catalans exercising their right to vote in an independence referendum.
The European Commission said ‘ proportionate use of force’ was necessary to uphold the rule of law.
So far, the pressure being applied on Britain to make Brexit as difficult as possible has been less extreme, but I fear now that Brussels is cranking up the intimidation.
Indeed, it is no exaggeration to say we are witnessing a new Project Fear. Instead of the shameless propaganda exercise designed by then Chancellor George Osborne during the EU referendum campaign, in which Remainers prophesied Armageddon if we withdrew, this is now being orchestrated in Brussels.
Yesterday, the head of the Paris-based Organisation for Economic Co- operation and Development (OECD) used grotesquely inflammatory language to describe Brexit.
Angel Gurria, the Mexican Secretary- General of the notionally independent thinktank, likened the impact to the Blitz — the savage bombing by the German Luftwaffe between September 1940 and May 1941, which destroyed one-third of London and killed 32,000 British citizens.
Realising the offensiveness of his remarks, Gurria added: ‘. . . except fortunately not the Blitz.’ What an outrageous view from the head of an organisation whose mission is ‘to promote policies that will improve the economic and social well-being of people around the world’.
Clearly, such scaremongering is spread by EU cheerleaders who think they can grind down the British people and force a second referendum.
Indeed, Juncker and his cronies are cynically trying to exploit what they see as Theresa May’s weak and divided government.
However, even though they must know it in their heart — and Juncker conceded as much last week when he heaped praise on Britain for its role in World War II — these hectoring Eurocrats appear to have forgotten the sheer fortitude of the British people.
Spirit
Faced with annihilation by the Nazis and inspired by Winston Churchill, the British people refused to be intimidated and fought back to win a war of attrition. That spirit remains. Indeed, Juncker, who said on Friday the UK would ‘have to pay’ for talks to advance, has a fight on his hands.
That fight has become even tougher in view of the fact that Mrs May’s hopes of Angela Merkel showing more sympathy to Britain have been dashed. The German leader insists: ‘In is in and out is out.’ Meanwhile, leaders of the 27 remaining EU countries ignore the fact that they will suffer as a result of Britain leaving and that it is in their own interests to ease our departure.
The truth is, the EU needs our money. That is why Juncker & Co are demanding a Brexit divorce bill of 50 billion euros. The EU needs our soldiers and our spies, too.
Above all, it needs to learn from our economy, which is the greatest job creation machine across the EU. Our unemployment rate is just 4.3 per cent — half the 9.5 per cent in France. Although economic expansion has slowed in 2017, over the past few years the UK has been the fastest-growing advanced economy.
No wonder those Brussels pygmies are convinced their strongest weapon in their battle to stop Britain leaving their cosy club is by asking for a scandalously punitive sum as the price.
Most reasonably, Mrs May — fully aware of hostility here towards the New Project Fear and the fact the extra money is designed to cover future pension liabilities of Brussels bureaucrats — does not want to go much beyond paying a £20 billion Brexit divorce bill.
For their part, the EU’s Brexit negotiators are convinced they have their British counterparts in a stranglehold because Mrs May is committed to fiscal responsibility and wants to eliminate the budget deficit by 2025. An inflated divorce bill would break those intentions to smithereens.
Defiance
Thus Brussels is counting on the Government failing to achieve an acceptable Brexit deal and then having to present this bad deal to Parliament. Brussels would hope that, faced with an unsatisfactory deal, MPs would reject it — therefore sabotaging Brexit.
The next move in this cynical gameplan would be for a humbled UK Government to go back to the British people with a second referendum — which would vote Remain.
And so, just as happened with the Danes, French, Irish and Dutch, the unelected Brussels machine would have destroyed the democratic wishes of millions of people.
This is why, rather than be blackmailed into submission — in the words of Brussels’ OECD lickspittles — Britain’s negotiating team needs to show the kind of defiance as exemplified in the Blitz.
If ever there was a time for the country to reignite that spirit and come together behind the Government and this country’s precious democratic institutions, it is now.