The Brexit campaign, in horse racing terms, has rounded the last turn and is on the run in to the winning post. It is a two horse race. “Stay” and “Leave” are matching each other stride for stride, if the polls are to be believed.
Which horse has the greater reserves of energy and which horse has the greater will to win? We are all watching in suspense from the stands.
But are the polls to be believed? They suggest a neck-and-neck finish. But the polls have been wrong. Particularly in referenda, pollsters are told one thing by voters who end up doing the opposite.
In Irish EU referenda, a disillusioned No vote emerged under the radar on two occasions to give the governments of the day a “wallop”. The Seanad Abolition referendum was narrowly defeated even though the polls were showing a comfortable victory for the abolitionists. Curiously, when the Referendum Commission on the Seanad Referendum conducted a follow-up survey, the proportion of persons who claimed to have voted far exceeded the actual turn-out, and the margin of defeat had widened hugely from the narrow outcome in the ballot boxes.
It is one thing to give an answer to a pollster; it is a different thing to turn out and vote. Many people polled are really predicting the outcome rather than revealing their own true thoughts. Many non-voters tell the pollsters that they will be voting.
The real question on Brexit is: “Which side is supported by the voters most likely to turn up at the polling stations on 23rd June?”
The Stay campaigners have won the economic argument; but have they won the political argument?
The maths looks convincing. But the problem is one of disillusionment with the EU project.
Across Europe, there is little enthusiasm left for further integration. The most recent Irish Times poll showed that most Irish voters by a wide margin oppose further integration. Even Donald Tusk, the pro-EU Polish President of the EU Council, has pointed out the dangers of allowing a federalist elite in the EU to propose further integration steps when the people of Europe are simply not in support of such measures.
In the course of arguing the Stay position in a recent TV debate, David Cameron casually remarked that he didn’t much like the European Parliament. It is that sort of indifference or subdued hostility towards the EU project and institutions that forms the backdrop to the Brexit campaign.
Nobody is campaigning on a pro-integration basis; the Stay side is campaigning on a choice between two evils basis. There is virtually no idealism on offer; the most “idealism” appears to be a form of Trump-like “Make Britain Great Again” agenda on the part of some Leave campaigners.
If the campaign is a struggle for the “hearts and minds” of the British people, the Stay campaign is addressed to the mind while the Leave campaign is speaking to the heart.
Why would a North of England Labour party supporter go out to save David Cameron’s skin? Would he or she feel that the comparative boom in London is trickling down to Bradford? Just as Enda Kenny’s “Let’s Keep the Recovery Going” message fell flat in rural Ireland, the Stay campaign’s appeal to voters to look at their wallets may have little appeal where wallets are thinnest.
Labour is watching the “Blue on Blue” Tory civil war while the party under Corbyn is a flaccid, demoralised and confused movement controlled by a far left ideology that simply doesn’t care about free-market economics, and can’t wait for the Tories to fall apart.
There is a superficial air of unity on the Leave side.
None of this augurs well for a political mobilisation of the Stay vote.
Cameron went to his fellow leaders in Europe seeking an emergency brake on immigration; Merkel sent him home with an emergency brake on migrant welfare. The immigration issue is as powerful as it is delusional. Migrants are not coming to claim welfare by and large. But Little Britain sees migration as evidence of national helplessness. And so the Leave campaign has a dog-whistle issue which is so hard to counter.
From Ireland’s perspective, Brexit is a grave risk. We simply do not want and cannot afford to lose our best, and sometimes our only, ally on many issues in Europe.
I do not believe in the politics of fear. I simply do not believe that there will be border posts along the North-South land frontier in the event of Brexit. Some form of Common Travel Area will re-emerge. After all, it is very difficult to see the UK wanting to re-impose visas for EU citizens travelling to the UK post-Brexit. Immigration control on EU migrants will be done by means of work-permits and welfare controls rather than by visa.
Given that the EU treaties envisage a negotiated exit by an agreement approved by the remaining member states on the basis of QMV for any member state leaving the Union, and given that there will have to be unanimity for a time extension if the exit agreement is not negotiated within two years of the UK notifying its intention to leave, and given that it is highly unlikely that an exit agreement would be concluded within two years, Ireland would have considerable leverage in securing the most beneficial agreement available in the circumstances.
But unless there is a Norway-type EEA agreement with the UK, there will be significant economic and tariff consequences for Ireland. And the Leave campaigners will not admit now that Brexit will, in the end, lead to a Norway-type deal for the UK. The realities of the situation would only be admitted after a Brexit vote had occurred.
Irish voters on 23rd June should remember Ireland’s vital interests are at stake – politically and economically. They know how referenda can be lost and won.
From our own point of view there is only one message: if you know anyone in Northern Ireland or in Britain, call them or text them with a simple message – Vote Stay.