Not much sign of honest debate yet

Immigration was always going to be centre-stage in the EU referendum debate and the Prime Minister fanned the flames this week by raising the prospect of Calais-style Jungle camps cropping up in Kent if voters back leaving. This was indisputably a calculated move, designed to appeal to the large number of people still said to be undecided. Invoking the prospect of the Garden of England having to host migrant camps like the one in Calais certainly grabbed the attention.

And it reflected the awkward challenge facing David Cameron as recent polls suggest more of us will vote to get out rather than stay.

He is aware that for many voters, it is not what the EU gives us but what the EU takes away which is most likely to influence their vote.

The paradox is that this particular issue can be argued both ways. In one way, the treaty that has allowed British passport controls to be made across the Channel – preventing many migrants from claiming asylum here – shows that it is possible for two countries to make arrangements outside of the EU.

But it is equally true the treaty could be unilaterally torn up by the French authorities precisely because it is not an EU-binding one.

Voters deserve an honest debate from politicians about Europe but that is not what we have seen this week.

A case of “could do better.”