Don’t panic. Or mention the war

There is an increasing air of shrill desperation as campaigning builds for the In, Out and possibly shake it all about, event on 23rd June.

Aware that the consequences of the ‘wrong’ choice will be slow to manifest themselves, I have taken to switching off when either side takes to the air. I note, with grateful approval, the BBC’s desire to remain impartial in its coverage though I despair at the bluster, and often fact-free communications, the Corporation has no option but to report.

Other media are less ambiguous. There is no doubt that The Daily Mail and its unlikely bedfellows at Murdoch Central want out. Left-leaning outlets are keen to point out that those who see a comfortable future for Britain outside the EU tend to be distinctively whiter, noticeably richer and considerably older than those who wish to remain.

It was inevitable, therefore, that Dad’s Army and the Second Scuffle would come into play sooner rather than later.

And so, on Sunday, inevitably it was Boris who came out and said that Hitler (and before him Napoleon) had sought to unify Europe, that both had failed and that the EU is: “an attempt to do this by different methods.” As a Classics scholar he should also have mentioned that not even the Romans could keep Europe together, yet theirs was the most successful of successful Empires, despite, or because of, the differences between all involved parties.

I am disappointed that he did not assume the sartorial standards of his spiritual mentor, Nigel Farage, and wear ancient tweed armour as he presented his version of history.

The communication battle for the hearts and minds – aka votes – of Britain’s electorate is heating up and I am fearful that facts have become innocent victims in the communication conflict.

In truth no-one knows what In or Out looks like.

The issues are fearfully complicated, a real-life Game of Thrones if you like, where income and prosperity based on trade comprise the prize. I believe that we would be better served were we to be provided with accurate data and evidence-based information as opposed to opinion from those who appear to see only personal advantage from backing one camp or the other.

This article was originally published on LinkedIn on 17 May