08/08/2014
Complaining about Mr Johnson's exit plan, and its lack of reference to other work, the Civitas think tank
declares that: "Proper blueprints for exit do exist". They should, it says, "be given more prominence if Eurosceptics are to do more than preach to the choir".
It then goes on to promote two "upcoming Civitas papers (13 August and September 2014)" which examine Brexit differently. The first,
With Friends Like These has a full discussion of possible exit mechanisms and strategies for achieving Britain's goals.
The second is called
Softening the Blow and asks key industries what a "worst case scenario" would look like, so policymakers know what to avoid, and then constructs a "best case" goals list.
Needless to say, there is absolutely no reference to
Flexcit, even though the eighteenth version is now online, constituting the most comprehensive exit plan ever attempted, with ideas invited from all quarters. Never has Civitas ever acknowledged its existence, much less commented on the ideas we are circulating.
Like the rest of them, therefore, when Civitas wants exit plans to be given "more prominence", it means give
it more prominence, event to the extent of applauding its two plans that have not even been published.
Whether these plans will be any good, remains to be seen â we can't know until they are published, but if the same closed minds are at work, it is unlikely that anything of value to emerge. Typically of the London-centric breed of Tory boy think tanks, all Civitas seems to be interested in is me, me, me.
This is the trouble with the entire eurosceptic movement. With the prospect of a referendum firmer than it ever has been, many of the different components are all rushing around to produce their own individual "plans", without the least attempt at discussion and debate.
Recently, former UKIP secretary Anthony Scholefield - now running his own
Futurus think tank - wrote:
We are trying to win a referendum and win a referendum in such a way that a pro-EU executive must carry out the result. We are fighting the referendum with a plan with an instruction to the Executive. We are not in a competition for establishing the very best theoretical basis for Britain in a post-EU world, we are establishing a clear, tested, business-friendly plan which should take on the aura of "inevitability", such as preceded the establishment of American and Indian Independence.
We can see why buffoons such as Mr Johnson should seek to hijack "Brexit" to further their own personal ambitions, but the rest of the movement should be able to rise above this, and engage in an open debate.
On the other hand, there is the dog that didn't bark. The one organisation from which we hear absolutely nothing about exit plans is UKIP. This is an organisation dedicated to leaving the EU â or so we are told â yet it has no published exit plan. It does not even have a fixed view on how we should secure our exit, to which all of its members subscribe.
Nevertheless, when Alexander (aka Boris) Johnson can spend £100,000 of taxpayers' money on his vainglorious attempt at an exit plan, one might have thought that Mr Farage could do likewise. But more money has passed from his own expenses account to his wife than has been spent on researching the UK's exit. And still the party is silent.
As opposed to Civitas, therefore, when it comes to UKIP, it changes the rules. Exit plan? "Not me", says UKIP, "nothing to do with us, guv".
FORUM THREAD
