Norway

The British constitution is built on compromise and moderation; it's one of the main reasons why this country enjoyed a period of relative domination in the 19th century while our neighbours tore themselves apart. Referendums do not encourage compromise, which makes them such bitter devices, and why the last few weeks have been so painful. But now that the British people have made their choice – and I have no idea if it was the right one – we have the opportunity to make a compromise that will cause the least amount of pain. I'm talking about the Norway option, which an increasing number of Conservative MPs are coming around to. This is a half-way house between membership of the EU and separation.

This is a translation of an article I wrote for the Norwegian daily VG Never since the German attack on Norway in 1940 destroyed Neville Chamberlain’s premiership and brought Winston Churchill to power, has your country been so discussed in Britain. Supporters of Britain staying in the EU warn of Norway's 'fax democracy'. The 'leave' campaign denounce Norwegian politicians who tell us about the dangers of following the Norwegian example, as liars bought with EU gold. There has been propaganda from both sides, of course, but the sheer lack of substance behind the 'leave' campaign is stunning.  The right-wing politicians, who dominate the anti-European cause, want the British to take an extraordinarily important decision.

We’ve been warned that Brexit could spell the end of cheap travel. But is it really true that Britain voting out of Europe would hit holidaymakers in the pocket? Easyjet’s boss Dame Carolyn McCall said before that Brexit ‘wouldn’t be good for Britain’. And in a company prospectus, the airline warned this year that if Britain votes out in the EU referendum in June, then it could have a ‘material adverse effect’ on the budget airline. But does this hold up to scrutiny? Easyjet says that: ‘The outcome of this decision (in the referendum) could have a material adverse effect on easyJet’s financial condition and results of operations.’ Obviously for passengers, bad financial conditions for a company mean rising ticket prices.

David Cameron wants to get the European Union referendum over with quickly — and understandably so. Things are still going well for him, and his political opposition is in disarray. The ‘in’ campaign will draw heavily upon his personal authority and the public is not (yet) fed up with him. Ideally, he wants to start campaigning next month — and many of his allies are at it already. Opinion polls show a large number of undecided voters. So this may very well be a campaign where a great many are open to persuasion and hoping for a high-quality debate. They will have been disappointed so far. The ‘in’ campaign has been up and running for months, and recently secured large donations from Goldman Sachs and other American megabanks.

‘So what’s your alternative?’ demand Euro-enthusiasts. ‘D’you want Britain to be like Norway? Or like Switzerland? Making cuckoo clocks? Is that what you want? Is it? Eh?’ The alternative to remaining in a structurally unsafe building is, of course, walking out; but I accept that this won’t quite do as an answer. Although staying in the EU is a greater risk than leaving — the migration and euro crises are deepening, and Britain is being dragged into them — change-aversion is deep in our genome, and we vote accordingly. Europhiles know that most referendums go the way of the status quo, which is why their campaign is based around conjuring inchoate fears of change. What is the alternative?

David Cameron is off to Iceland today to give a speech on Britain’s European Union membership and it’s a clear signal that he will eventually campaign for Britain to remain in. Until now, the Prime Minister has avoided talking about why Britain should 'Remain' or 'Leave' the EU — instead focusing on the importance of the renegotiations. His argument will be based on Iceland and Norway, who are members of the European Economic Area — which allows them to trade inside the single market. According comments from No.10 sources, Cameron will warn this means they have less control over decision making in Brussels and this kind of looser relationship would not be right for Britain.