5:48PM BST 20 Jul 2013
We can’t be told our own views on EU
What are Eurocrats allowed to know about what we Brits think about the EU – which is not being reported in Britain? The answer is the findings of a new poll carried out by the Eurosceptic Bruges Group, which for the first time ever put to voters the crucial question that our politicians seem determined to keep buried from view.How would we vote if we were given a clear choice between remaining in the EU or leaving it to join the European Free Trade Area (Efta), which would still give us full access to the single market? Only 29 per cent want to stay in the EU. Well over twice as many, 71 per cent, think we should leave (by invoking Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty) and join Efta.
If ever we are to have a grown-up discussion about Britain’s relations with “Europe”, this is the choice that should be at the centre of the debate. It is the only question that makes practical sense. But our politicians seem so terrified of it being raised that it scarcely ever gets mentioned.
It took my friend Mary Ellen Synon, a Brussels-based Irish journalist, to notice that, although the Bruges Group poll was only mentioned by one UK newspaper, it was featured in the European Commission’s daily press summary, circulated to everyone who matters in Brussels.
At least those Eurocrats are allowed to know what we are thinking, even if most of us in Britain aren’t being told.
=============================
Media: self-censorship on the EU
Richard North, 19/07/2013
Howsoever, Mary Ellen (or M E, as she calls herself) makes a serious point in a serious way. Although the Bruges Group poll, finds that most people – given a choice – would prefer EFTA to the EU, as a way of belonging to the Single Market, the British press, with the one exception of the Daily Express have decided that you should not know this. Even to this day, the Express is on its own in reporting the poll finding as news.
But what M E reports is that the European Commission, which produces a Daily Press Review, making up a 250-300 page printed bundle of stories from newspapers, is very often reluctant to draw attention to her stories.
Yesterday, though, she noted on page 194 of the review a page copied from the Daily Express: "Call to leave the EU is backed by 71%". The poll was commissioned by the very serious Bruges Group, so she reckoned: "Well, that's an important story. How'd I miss that on the news websites this morning?"
In this, she had assumed a similar sort of headline was in the other British papers. Except she now realises it wasn't. She saw the story, whoever who read the Express saw the story - and more to the point, the eurocrats running the press review felt the poll was important enough that even the boss-eurocrats at the top of headquarters had to see the story.
But almost nobody else did, if they relied on the legacy media. As far as we can see, just the one paper carried the poll. Says M E, "I have no answer for why the others did not. Have they got summer work-experience interns running the news desks or what?"
It is that "or what?" that worried me. I've been around the block a few times, sufficient to have developed a fairly well-developed news sense. I thought it was an important story. The several people who sent me e-mails alerting me clearly thought likewise. The Express thinks the story was important, the Commission did, M E certainly does and Booker – who is running it on Sunday – agrees.
But the rest of the media, when it concerns a poll that finds people would prefer the "Norway Option", despite their masters telling them otherwise, suddenly finds the story completely lacks any news value.
This, in my view, cannot be coincidental. We have here another wicked example of self-censorship. It suggests a media which is more interested in shaping the debate than retailing the news. We've said that before but it really cannot be repeated often enough that the media are not our friends.
COMMENT: "CONTROLLING THE DEBATE" THREAD
=======================================
Seems I had my eye off the ball this week. On Thursday morning as usual I picked up the 
European Commission's Daily Press Review on my way into the midday briefing. I've mentioned this thing before: it is a 250-300 page printed bundle of stores from newspapers across Europe, circulated to the eurocrats at commission headquarters (yes, you pay for it, and no, you can't have a copy).
I flip through every day it to see if there's anything I've missed on the web -- and also to see which stories it is the eurocrats who put the thing together are choosing for their colleagues to see. (Hint: my stuff almost never makes it, not even when I take the whole leader page in the Irish Daily Mail.)
This particular headline did stop me. It was on page 194 of the review, on a page copied from the Daily Express: 'Call to leave the EU is backed by 71%'
Except now I realise it wasn't. I saw the story, whoever who read the Express saw the story -- and more to the point, the eurocrats running the press review felt the poll was important enough that even the boss-eurocrats at the top of headquarters had to see the story -- but almost nobody else did. As far as I can see, just the one paper carried the poll.
I have no answer for why the others did not. Have they got summer work-experience interns running the the news desks or what?
So, to make up for what you most likely haven't seen on the news pages of whatever papers you read, here it is, from the Bruges Group:
'A majority of voters would prefer the UK to be a member of the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) as opposed to the EU, according to a new survey published by the Bruges Group.'
'Of those expressig a preference in the survey, a clear 71 percent said that Britain would be better off as a member of the trade group EFTA, as opposed to 29 percent who thought that Britain should remain a member of the EU.'
'The 71 percent in favour comprised support across voters intending to vote for all of the major political parties. (Conservative 81 percent, Labour 54 percent, Lib Dem 50 percent, UKP 95 percent, and others 62 percent).'
'EFTA differs from the EU in that it would not have jurisdication over the UK's agriculture, fisheries, home affairs or justice policies.'
'EFTA would also allow the UK to negotiate free trade agreements with countries outside the EU.'
'In addition, Britain would become again a sovereign nation with more power over its domestic affairs.'
Robert Oulds, director of the Bruges Group, said: 'This poll not only adds to the growing body of evidence that a majority of the British people are realising that Britain would be better off out of the European Union but it also shows that there is a viable alternative to EU membership. The option of re-joining EFTA and becoming like Norway and Switzerland is very popular with the British people.'
Technical notes, for the analytical among you: the opinion poll was carried out by Survation on 3rd July 2013 with 1,085 respondents, with a 3 percent margin of error.
Though I'd say the margin of error by newspapers in not running this story is vastly beyond 3 percent.
Posts
