International Economics and Economic Policy

, Volume 13, Issue 4, pp 539–548 | Cite as

Cameron’s information disaster in the referendum of 2016: an exit from Brexit?

Forum

Abstract

The BREXIT referendum of June 23, 2016, represents a rather surprising decision by the UK electorate and it is a historical result with implications for the UK, Europe and the world economy. It can be shown that a major information blunder by the Cameron government forms part of the explanation of the referendum result: The 16 page info brochure that government sent out to households did not contain a single key finding of the Treasury study on the economic effects of EU membership on the UK and the cost of BREXIT, respectively. While prior to the Scottish referendum of 2014 the Cameron government conveyed key economic insights to households, before the BREXIT vote the government did not give the Treasury’s finding that a 10 % output loss was to be expected as a long run BREXIT effect – had households obtained this information, the referendum would have been 52 % in favor of Remain. Thus there is a new, very convincing argument for a second referendum. Also, US perspectives are emphasized.

References

  1. Francois J et al (2013) Reducing transatlantic barriers to trade and investment. CEPR (for the European Commission), LondonGoogle Scholar
  2. Frey B, Schneider F (1978) A politico-economic model of the United Kingdom. Econ J 88:243–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. HM Government (2016a) HM treasury analysis: the long-term economic impact of EU membership and the alternatives, London, April 2016Google Scholar
  4. HM Government (2016b) Why the government believes that remaining in the European Union is the best decision for the UK, info brochure sent to households, London https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/515068/why-the-government-believes-that-voting-to-remain-in-the-european-union-is-the-best-decision-for-the-uk.pdf
  5. Jungmittag A, Welfens PJJ (2016) Beyond EU-US trade dynamics: TTIP effects related to foreign direct investment and innovation. EIIW paper No. 214 – presented at the IMF, Washington DC, June 28, 2016; forthcoming in Journal www.eiiw.eu
  6. Welfens PJJ (2011), Innovations in Macroeconomics, 3rd revised and enlarged edition, Heidelberg and New York: SpringerGoogle Scholar
  7. Welfens PJJ (2016) BREXIT aus Versehen, Heidelberg: Springer, November 2016 (ISBN 978-3-658-15874-3); English version forthcoming as Welfens, P. (2016), An Accidental Brexit, UK Government Policy Pitfalls and New EU & Global Economic Perspectives, December 2016Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.European Institute for International Economic RelationsUniversity of Wuppertal (EIIW)WuppertalGermany
  2. 2.Schumpeter School of Business and EconomicsUniversity of WuppertalWuppertalGermany
  3. 3.AICGS/Johns Hopkins UniversityWashingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations