Daniel Hannan

The police want us to know one thing about Anthony Williams, the alleged LNER knife attacker. We can only speculate about his motives, his record or whether he was responsible for an earlier attack in the London Docklands. But one fact was broadcast almost immediately: he was British-born. The police put out a statement soon after arresting him (along with a second man, who was released afterwards): A 32-year-old man, a black British national, and a 35-year-old man, a British national of Caribbean descent, were both arrested on suspicion of attempted murder. Both were born in the UK. OK, he was born in the UK. So were three of the four 7/7 bombers. So were the men who murdered Lee Rigby outside Woolwich Barracks.

In October 1936, on the anniversary of Columbus’s discovery of the New World, a ceremony was held at Salamanca University, in the heart of the nationalist Spain, to celebrate the ‘Day of the Race’. The Bishop of Salamanca, who had recently offered up his episcopal palace to be Franco’s headquarters, stood in the great hall next to the founder of the Spanish Foreign Legion, General José Millán Astray, a one-armed and one-eyed thug of a man. Also present was the university rector, Miguel de Unamuno, an eminent Basque philosopher who had supported the nationalist coup when it was launched four months earlier, but had since become disillusioned with its viciousness.

In October 1936, on the anniversary of Columbus’s discovery of the New World, a ceremony was held at Salamanca University, in the heart of the nationalist Spain, to celebrate the ‘Day of the Race’. The Bishop of Salamanca, who had recently offered up his episcopal palace to be Franco’s headquarters, stood in the great hall next to the founder of the Spanish Foreign Legion, General José Millán Astray, a one-armed and one-eyed thug of a man. Also present was the university rector, Miguel de Unamuno, an eminent Basque philosopher who had supported the nationalist coup when it was launched four months earlier, but had since become disillusioned with its viciousness.

Pull yourselves together, you wusses. It’s a minor readjustment of our tariff arrangements we’re talking about, not an epidemic or a foreign invasion or an asteroid strike. Not that anyone would guess it from the apocalyptic vocabulary you’re using. 'A hard Brexit,' says Keir Starmer for Labour, 'would be catastrophic for our economy, living standards, jobs and future prosperity'. Tim Farron, the Lib Dem leader, agrees it would be 'economically disastrous'. The CBI calls it 'very negative'. Sound familiar? We became accustomed to such over-the-top language during the referendum campaign. The very act of voting Leave, we were told, would cause an immediate recession. Unemployment would surge and the stock exchange would collapse, destroying the value of our pensions.

We’re closing 2016 by republishing our ten most-read articles of the year. Here’s No. 8: Daniel Hannan's piece from June, in which he argues why voting 'Leave' is the right decision For me, as for so many people, it’s a heart versus head issue. I’m emotionally drawn to Europe. I speak French and Spanish and have lived and worked all over the Continent. I’ve made many friends among the Brussels functionaries. Lots of them, naturally, are committed Euro-federalists. Yet they are also decent neighbours, loyal companions and generous hosts. I feel twinges of unease about disappointing them, especially the anglophiles. But, in the end, the head must rule the heart. Remainers often tell us to think of our children, and I’m doing precisely that.

We know what people voted against,’ say half-clever ­pundits, ‘but it’s far from clear what they voted for.’ Actually, it’s very clear: the ­British voted to leave the EU and take back control of their own laws. They didn’t ­dictate precisely what kind of deal we should have with our neighbours after leaving: that is for ministers to negotiate. But when Leave campaigners invited people to ‘take back ­control’, voters understood what that meant: legal supremacy should return from Brussels to Westminster. Remainers spent the campaign trying to suggest that the EU was just one among several international associations in which Britain participated.

This is the transcript of speech delivered by Daniel Hannan during the Spectator's second Brexit debate. Full coverage of the event can be found here.  I heard today what must be reckoned to be the single worst argument that we’ve had from any major figure on either side of this campaign. It came from Ed Balls. What he said is, we should vote to remain in and then reform it. Why has nobody thought of that before, what a good idea! Think of the story of our involvement with the European Union these past four decades. If you have been listening for at least five minutes to politicians of any party, they will all have given you the same line.

For me, as for so many people, it’s a heart versus head issue. I’m emotionally drawn to Europe. I speak French and Spanish and have lived and worked all over the Continent. I’ve made many friends among the Brussels functionaries. Lots of them, naturally, are committed Euro-federalists. Yet they are also decent neighbours, loyal companions and generous hosts. I feel twinges of unease about disappointing them, especially the anglophiles. But, in the end, the head must rule the heart. Remainers often tell us to think of our children, and I’m doing precisely that. I am thinking, not just about the EU as it is now, but about the diminished role that a surly, introverted Europe will have in their lifetime. And that makes my decision very easy. 1.

A letter appeared in the Independent a few weeks ago signed by various environmentalist grandees — heads of green lobby groups, former chairmen of eco-quangos and the like. It warned against Brexit on the grounds that EU laws had ‘a hugely positive effect’ on the environment. It didn’t explain why a post-EU Britain wouldn’t retain, replicate or even improve these ‘hugely positive’ laws. As usual, it implied that voters needed to have such things dictated to them. The really interesting thing, though, was the list of bodies that followed the signatories’ names: Natural England, the Green Alliance, the RSPB, the Natural Environment Research Council, a couple of universities — you get the picture.

‘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?

I have no doubt that David Cameron will secure 100 per cent of his stated aims vis-à-vis the EU. The reason he is stating them in public is that the other members have already agreed to them in private. They have done so cheerfully, incredulous at how little is being asked. The other heads of government know, as the PM knows, that his four 'reforms' will alter nothing. Think about it. 1. Opting out of the words 'ever closer union' Just the words. Not the fact of ever closer union. The real way to opt out would be to end the automatic supremacy of EU over British law. As long as European Commissioners and judges, who loudly proclaim that deeper integration is their supreme goal, can over-ride UK statues, nothing will change. 2.

[audioplayer src="http://rss.acast.com/viewfrom22/michaelgovesfightforjustice/media.mp3" title="Daniel Hannan and Greg Callus discuss the battles ahead for Michael Gove" startat=42] Listen [/audioplayer]They have taken to calling themselves the ‘Runnymede Tories’: those Conservative MPs who, knowing that David Cameron has a majority of just 12, want to sabotage his manifesto commitment to end the direct jurisdiction of the European Court of Human Rights in Britain. Well, sorry chaps, but that name is taken. The actual Runnymede Tories — that is, the Conservatives elected to Runnymede Borough Council — will be gathering next month on the bank of the Thames to celebrate the anniversary of Magna Carta.