The PM’s scare tactics on Brexit backfired

In one sense, David Cameron and his aides raised a valid point when they suggested that a British exit from the European Union would raise questions about France’s continued willingness to help us stem the flow of migrants over and under the English Channel to the UK. Were Britain to be outside the EU, no longer France’s partner in the union, the French might well be tempted to abandon the Anglo-French treaty signed at Le Touquet in 2003 that effectively moves the British border to French soil in the Pas de Calais. The agreement is deeply unpopular with local residents and politicians, since it means migrants who cannot reach Britain take up residence in camps such as “the Jungle”. A French government facing looser ties with Britain might well succumb to such pressure over Calais, it might be imagined.

Yet Mr Cameron’s scenario rather badly overlooked an important fact. Some French leaders – including the current government – consider the present arrangements to be in French interests, too, believing that opening the port and tunnel to migrants would only attract yet more uninvited arrivals to France. The statement from Paris that has now embarrassed Mr Cameron over his referendum gambit was surely predictable.

As well as overlooking the views of the French in his zeal to persuade voters to stay in, Mr Cameron, in painting his gloomy picture of post-Brexit life, also ignores the new opportunities Britain would enjoy outside the EU. After leaving, the UK would be free to implement new immigration policies, new welfare policies and new foreign policies (including, perhaps, new treaties with countries such as France). All of those could be used to deter unwanted migrants from coming here and to remove those who do make the journey. In short, even if we did lose French cooperation in Calais, we might gain things that are more valuable.

The truth about the situation that would face Britain after exit is that it is uncertain: both negative and positive outcomes are possible. Of course Mr Cameron is reluctant to discuss that nuanced truth with voters, instead preferring to offer a selective and simplified account, heavy on fear but light on facts and context. The embarrassment he now faces at French hands should cause Mr Cameron to reconsider his referendum tactics. These events have shown that he would be unwise to resort to Project Fear, instead of engaging in the mature, factual debate that voters want and deserve.