The sorry tale of a one-sided barrage of taxpayer-funded pro-EU bias

Graham Charles Lear
4 min readJul 18, 2019

How Cameron and friends tried to buy the Referendum result

Just prior to the start of the EU Referendum campaign, the Cameron government spent £9.3 million of taxpayers’ money on a Remain campaign leaflet and on online Remain advertising.

The propaganda leaflet was delivered to every home in the land. The digital content was promoted heavily.

The Government’s attempted indoctrination by Internet

What is generally never reported — by the BBC, the mainstream media, or the big Leave/Brexit organisations — is that 31% of the £9.3 million that the government spent on its propaganda for Remain went on the internet in the form of ‘digital promotion’.

Readers might wish to take stock of that for a moment. After Remain lost, day after day the public were told that Russia or Cambridge Analytica or Arron Banks or someone else bought the result of the Referendum using the Internet.

In fact, the British government spent almost £3 million on a website and on ‘digital promotion’, in order to influence the result for Remain.

Oh, and the Government did so just before any campaign spending limits started, in April 2016.

The propaganda was outrageous

Below is just one example from the Government’s website, set up specifically to promote the Establishment’s message that a vote to leave the EU would be catastrophic for British people.

Below is just one example from the Government’s website, set up specifically to promote the Establishment’s message that a vote to leave the EU would be catastrophic for British people.

“HM Treasury analysis shows Britain’s economy could be tipped into a year-long recession. At least 500,000 jobs could be lost and GDP could be around 3.6% lower following a vote to leave the EU than it would be if we remained in the EU.“Average real wages could be nearly 3% lower than if we remained in the EU, which would amount to a reduction of £800 a year for someone working full time on the average wage.“Treasury analysis also shows that if the UK leaves the EU, after 15 years this could mean:

  1. a cost per year equivalent to £4,300 per household in the UK

2. a hit to tax receipts of £36 billion a year

3. this is the equivalent of an extra 8p on the basic rate of income tax”

These forecasts were dropped — quietly

Later that year, in testimony to the Commons Treasury Select Committee, Chancellor Philip Hammond was forced to admit that the Treasury’s forecasts and dire threats were wrong.

“The model doesn’t capture all of the potential outcomes”

Some of those assumptions have already proved to be invalid”

The Government’s position is that we will not be seeking to pursue any of these modelled outcomes”

Philip Hammond, evidence to Treasury Select Committee Oct 2016

Where was any mention of sovereignty or democracy?

In any discussion of membership of the European Union, the issues of national sovereignty and democracy are paramount.

Yet neither of these words appeared even once in the Government’s leaflet. Instead, the Government’s focus throughout was on intimidating voters by threatening a financial apocalypse — massive jobs losses, huge annual costs to households, emergency budgets, etc.

The parallels with today

Today we see large online advertising campaigns by Remain organisations, urging people to lobby their MPs against Brexit. The money being spent is significant.

Meanwhile, most Brexit organisations struggle on with very little funding. Imagine what any LEAVE organisation could have done with even half of the Government’s pre-referendum £3m online budget?

None of the above figures is conjecture. The costings for the breakdown above come from the Cabinet Office and №10 and are official figures. Despite their europhiliac proclivities, on this, the civil servants and politicians came clean — perhaps because they had to admit the figures before the vote when they still thought they were going to win easily.

Remainers don’t like it when there are publish links to articles on social media. That is why when possible I myself on many of my articles show links. One typical reaction is to deflect attention away from the facts that are reported, by ignoring the content and asking “Who funds you? I have had this said quite a few times by rabid Remainers.

They use the strawman effect which is an intentionally misrepresented proposition that is set up because it is easier to defeat than an opponent’s real argument.

Please share as it hits Remainers where it hurts

Below you can read the full Government EU Referendum leaflet

[ Sources: Electoral Commission | Cabinet Office ]

--

--

Graham Charles Lear

What is life without a little controversy in it? Quite boring and sterile would be my answer.